Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: How a True(X) predicate can be defined for the set of analytic
 knowledge
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 13:00:56 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <vsh9ko$3mdkb$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vrfvbd$256og$2@dont-email.me> <vrh432$39r47$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrhami$3fbja$2@dont-email.me> <vrj9lu$1791p$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrjn82$1ilbe$2@dont-email.me> <vrmpc1$bnp3$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrmteo$cvat$6@dont-email.me> <vru000$33rof$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrug71$3gia2$6@dont-email.me>
 <0306c3c2d4a6d05a8bb7441c0b23d325aeac3d7b@i2pn2.org>
 <vrvnvv$ke3p$1@dont-email.me> <vs0egm$1cl6q$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs1f7j$296sp$2@dont-email.me> <vs3ad6$2o1a$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs4sjd$1c1ja$8@dont-email.me> <vs63o2$2nal3$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs6v2l$39556$17@dont-email.me> <vs8hia$13iam$1@dont-email.me>
 <vs8uoq$1fccq$2@dont-email.me> <vsb4in$14lqk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsb9d5$19ka5$1@dont-email.me> <vsdlq8$3shbn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vsemub$th5g$4@dont-email.me> <vsg1gh$2ehsf$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 20:00:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a561e93eaba3cd97d9344a7e666c556e";
	logging-data="3880587"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX184an+KvSJKdsDcM+f6lETT"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8KEiGfj9uhYCkmSU8aKLJIvzWhM=
In-Reply-To: <vsg1gh$2ehsf$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250401-4, 4/1/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 2942

On 4/1/2025 1:36 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2025-03-31 18:29:32 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 3/31/2025 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2025-03-30 11:20:05 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>> You have never expressed any disagreement with the starting points of
>>> Tarski's proof. You have ever claimed that any of Tarski's inferences
>>> were not truth preserving. But you have claimed that the last one of
>>> these truth preservin transformation has produced a false conclusion.
>>>
>>
>> It is ALWAYS IMPOSSIBLE to specify True(X) ∧ ~Provable(X)
>> (what Tarski proved) when-so-ever True(X) ≡ Provable(X).
>> https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_275_276.pdf
> 
> Tarski's proof was not about provability. Gödel had already proved
> that there are unprovable true sentences. Tarski's work is about
> definability.
> 

https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_275_276.pdf
Step (3) is self-contradictory, thus his whole proof fails.

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer