Re: H(D,D) cannot even be asked about the behavior of D(D) --- Truth Itself is not Broken.

On 6/15/2024 11:39 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/15/24 12:31 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/15/2024 11:24 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/15/24 12:11 PM, olcott wrote:

On 6/15/2024 10:52 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/15/24 11:41 AM, olcott wrote:

On 6/15/2024 10:18 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/15/24 11:03 AM, olcott wrote:

>
{thing} is the root of the whole knowledge tree.

>
And what DEFINES {thing}?
>

>
Its constituents.

>
In other words, the definition is circular.
>

>
If you can't understand that a type hierarchy is not circular
then your knowledge is woefully inadequate to continue this
discussion.

>
But the type hierarchy is not the definitions of the type hierarchy.
>
You can not DEFINE the hierarchy without reference to either circular defintions or terms outside your system.
>

>
Prove that.
>

 Try to show me one that does.
 

Yo are making the claim either show a concrete example
of this claim or retract it.

The simple explanation is how do you define one of the root terms. If you try to define it based on what derives from it, you get circular.
 

*IT IS ALWAYS A FREAKING TREE AND TREES NEVER HAVE ANY CYCLES*
Animal inherits some of its properties from {living thing}
and specifies additional properties that only apply to
the animal sub-type of living thing.
{Thing}--->[super type of]{Physically existing thing}
{Thing}<-----[sub type of]{Physically existing thing}
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer