Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Subject: Re: This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 14:12:41 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <v9qsn9$1tedb$33@dont-email.me>
References: <v86olp$5km4$1@dont-email.me> <v9okho$1i745$10@dont-email.me>
 <60c0214582c7f97e49ef6f8853bff95569774f97@i2pn2.org>
 <v9p7im$1p6bp$4@dont-email.me>
 <d67278caa0b8782725e806b61adf892028f2bf89@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qd2p$1tedb$10@dont-email.me>
 <4d8c7b1c69915ebbe108d7f4e29cf6172eac7759@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qel5$1tedb$13@dont-email.me>
 <43690773dba43c5d93d11635af0a26532e5be390@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qgn7$1tedb$15@dont-email.me>
 <6272b80d0aeaca324ac8624dce71945edeb59092@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qjg5$1tedb$17@dont-email.me>
 <2e642af254f6140ce8711da64f31d4fd8467d58b@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qkeb$1tedb$19@dont-email.me>
 <f883e0312dcbce8663eaa445348e225687d83959@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qm86$1tedb$22@dont-email.me>
 <a2c1ed800e02c5e922df63241206c00d855680d5@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qncv$1tedb$25@dont-email.me>
 <2d7efb21a7466aa56ed7be937da998852f6882af@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qon8$1tedb$27@dont-email.me>
 <e452294ec866e3297f9bfec55eff17db4a347a25@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qpju$1tedb$30@dont-email.me>
 <1ec5e64194f4e88998b8d462497e3a378e1d91fd@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 21:12:41 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5c4a0c817977c3965e873c4f304e2b88";
	logging-data="2013611"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18KHN1KbDnKVvEK0vk92FRN"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ebs5nCTNHqVS1RqsJChLWxz0bso=
In-Reply-To: <1ec5e64194f4e88998b8d462497e3a378e1d91fd@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4100

On 8/17/2024 1:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/24 2:19 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2024 1:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/24 2:04 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2024 12:51 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, you are just admitting you don't understand how 
>>>>> logic works.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you CHANGE an existing axiom, everything that depended on that 
>>>>> axiom needs to be re-verified.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you ADD a new axiom, it doesn't affect ANY argument that doesn't 
>>>>> try to use it, and thus doesn't affect Russel's Paradox.
>>>>
>>>> OK.
>>>>
>>>> I add the definition for the True(L, x) predicate
>>>> and every instance of the notion of True changes
>>>> in every formal mathematical logic system.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But either that changes what that instance means,
>>
>> When I stipulate what True(L,x) means then that is done.
>> It does not go on and in any circle endlessly redefining itself.
> 
> Nope. You can say for YOUR usage, what you mean by True(L,x). You can't 
> force others to use that, 

Likewise ZFC is a mere opinion that most everyone chooses to ignore.

> or reinterprete what others have said or 
> proven based on you stipulation, in fact, by stipulating that 
> definition, anythig that uses any other definition of it becomes out of 
> bounds for your argument.
> 
>>
>> Everything in logic the depended on some notion of True is
>> changed. Any logic operations that were not truth preserving
>> are discarded. The notion of valid inference is also changed
>> because it was not truth preserving.
>>
> 
> And needs to be reproved to see if it is still true.
> 
> 
>> When a conclusion is not a necessary consequence of all of its
>> premises then the argument is invalid.
>>
> 
> Right, so YOUR argument here is invalid.
> 

It is proven totally true entirely on the basis of the
meaning of its words. Math conventions to the contrary
simply ignore this.



-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer