Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Analytic Truth-makers
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 19:25:38 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <v7phm2$1dv95$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v7m26d$nrr4$1@dont-email.me>
 <e41a2d324173031e1fe47acc0fd69b94b7aba55e@i2pn2.org>
 <v7msg0$sepk$1@dont-email.me>
 <3fb77583036a3c8b0db4b77610fb4bf4214c9c23@i2pn2.org>
 <v7much$sepk$2@dont-email.me>
 <9577ce80fd6c8a3d5dc37b880ce35a4d10d12a0e@i2pn2.org>
 <v7n3ho$t590$1@dont-email.me>
 <7d9b88425623e1166e358f1bce4c3a2767c36da0@i2pn2.org>
 <v7naae$120r5$1@dont-email.me>
 <2a0f9a4235d75dee94ccae62b10d3afef5a966a5@i2pn2.org>
 <v7og8o$17h8r$8@dont-email.me> <v7p5g1$8c1e$1@solani.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 02:25:39 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="16ed067bd5cc70aacf71dd1f4de1f69e";
	logging-data="1506597"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/psE1Zv1VMuSUTgMhiGk1V"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:muxV/z0Rk9xu4OcX7cnmE7AiPL0=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v7p5g1$8c1e$1@solani.org>
Bytes: 2787

On 7/23/2024 3:57 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
> Since generations logicians have called sentences
> which you clumsily call "not a truth-bearer",
> simple called "undecidable" sentences.
> 

That is the same as calling a dead-cow a cow that does
not run very fast. It it terribly deceptive to overload
terms of the art with meaning having nothing to do with
their base meaning.

> A theory is incomplete, if it has undecidable
> sentences. There is a small difference between
> unprovable and undecidable.
> 

If an expression of language is WRONG then we can't
correctly blame the system for being incomplete.

> An unprovable senetence A is only a sentence with:
> 
> ~True(L, A).
> 
> An undecidable sentence A is a sentence with:
> 
> ~True(L, A) & ~True(L, ~A)
> 

The problem with this is that self-contradictory sentences
are WRONG. Blaming the formal system for being "incomplete"
is stupid.

> Meaning the sentence itself and its complement
> are both unprovable.
> 

"This sentence is not true" IS WRONG.

> olcott schrieb:
>> ~True(L,x) ∧ ~True(L,~x)
>> means that x is not a truth-bearer in L.
>> It does not mean that L is incomplete

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