Sujet : Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : sci.logic comp.theoryDate : 18. May 2024, 18:48:24
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v2am4p$2sdl6$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/18/2024 9:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/18/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
On 5/18/2024 7:43 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
No, your system contradicts itself.
>
>
You have never shown this.
The most you have shown is a lack of understanding of the
Truth Teller Paradox.
No, I have, but you don't understand the proof, it seems because you don't know what a "Truth Predicate" has been defined to be.
My True(L,x) predicate is defined to return true or false for every
finite string x on the basis of the existence of a sequence of truth
preserving operations that derive x from
A set of finite string semantic meanings that form an accurate
verbal model of the general knowledge of the actual world that
form a finite set of finite strings that are stipulated to have the
semantic value of Boolean true.
False(L,x) is defined as True(L,x).
If, as you claim p in L defined as ~True(L, p) results in True(L, p) being false, then p must be a true statement...
The wording of that seems to say that because p is known to be
untrue that this makes p true.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…