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: comp.theory
Subject: Re: All of computation and human reasoning can be encoded as finite
 string transformations --- Quine
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2025 14:58:55 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 71
Message-ID: <vu3jm0$c1to$4@dont-email.me>
References: <vu343r$20gn$2@dont-email.me>
 <fbe82c2374d539fb658a8f5569af102b713ecd01@i2pn2.org>
 <vu3cb7$95co$2@dont-email.me>
 <57fb4080f3b2783cb49a1aacdb43f02343fe9038@i2pn2.org>
 <kNbNP.989393$C61.271641@fx03.ams4> <vu3hqc$c1to$2@dont-email.me>
 <0be671e6df95f8a3c55e1ad89036f941592315d9@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2025 21:58:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7a034244d83f09ecbfab02b9bdb773a5";
	logging-data="395192"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19RUegzmtAusTgV3E3dIFII"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SdVm4T2UQfbHRYULI+2lvhPQlE4=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250420-6, 4/20/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <0be671e6df95f8a3c55e1ad89036f941592315d9@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4127

On 4/20/2025 2:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 4/20/25 3:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 4/20/2025 2:19 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Sun, 20 Apr 2025 14:54:55 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/20/25 1:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 4/20/2025 11:29 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/20/25 tic 1:33 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> No counter-example to the above statement exists for all computation
>>>>>>> and all human reasoning that can be expressed in language.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But can all Human reasoning be actually expressed in language?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For instance, how do you express the smell of a rose in a finite
>>>>>> string so you can do reasoning with it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
>>>>>
>>>>> all human reasoning that can be expressed in language <is> the
>>>>> {analytic} side of the analytic/synthetic distinction that humanity 
>>>>> has
>>>>> totally screwed up since
>>>>
>>>> But it isn't, and that is YOUR screw up. Part of the problem is that 
>>>> the
>>>> phrase "True by the meaning of the words alone", doesn't actually have
>>>> meaning in a Natural Language context, as words have vaired, imprecise,
>>>> and even spectrums of meaning, perhaps even multiple meanings at once.
>>>> (This is even a form of word play used to convey special meanings).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Two Dogmas of Empiricism Willard Van Orman Quine
>>>>> https://www.ditext.com/quine/quine.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Couldn't even understand that the term Bachelor as stipulated to have
>>>>> the semantic meaning of Bachelor(x) ≡ ~Married(x) ∧ Male(x) ∧ Adult(x)
>>>>> ∧ Human(x)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> No, the point he was making was that this is NOT the only possible
>>>> meaning of Bachelor.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, you are just showing you don't understand the arguments that you
>>>> read, because the go over your head, and then YOU just assume theny 
>>>> must
>>>> be wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, all that shows is your stupidity and ignorance.
>>>
>>> Attack the argument not the person.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>
>> Richard does this to try to get away with masking his own
>> complete ignorance of any of the words that I just used.
>>
> 
> Except that I ALWAYS start with the actual refutation, and thus you 
> claim is just a LIE.
> 
> Sorry, but you don't seem to understand how logic works.
> 
> Care to show how my refutation was incorrect?

You still have no idea what Quine's paper says and are
trying to get away with claiming that you even looked at it.

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