Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 5/22/2024 8:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:But that isn't the traditional "Liar's Paradix", because it is not normally stated in terms of a Truth Predicate.On 5/22/24 7:55 PM, olcott wrote:Let's use the more intuitive name lp so that we incorporate by*You are just not paying close enough attention again*>
>
When p defined as ~True(L, p)
True(L,p) is false
True(L,~p) is false
~True(L,~p) is true
>
x := y means x is defined to be another name for y
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logic_symbols
Right, so since p is DEFINED to be ~True(L, p), which since True(L, p) is false, must be true, that means that you are claiming that
T(L, <a statement that has been shown to be true>) is false.
>
Thus your True predicat is just broken.
>
reference (instead of ignore) all of the material about the liar paradox.
lp := ~True(L, lp)
You already said that you know the Liar Paradox is neither trueNope, shows you don't understand what the literature is saying.
nor false, thus not a truth-bearer. You proved that you know
more about self-reference than all of the standard literature
On 5/13/2024 7:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Nope, just proves your stupidity,
> Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p)
Those two things by themselves put you ahead of most experts
in the field. The very best expert in the field that I know of
does not know these two things and they only think that the Liar
Paradox might not be a truth-bearer, they do not know it is not.
But he is wrong, there is no syntax error for it in the logic field that Tarski is working in, as he assumes that logic is powerful enough to encode references, even to self, into the logical statements of the field.*Mikko rejects p := ~True(L,p) as a syntax error*>>
You ignored the part where Mikko agreed that
p defined as ~True(L, p)
is a syntax error:
So, what it the "Syntax Error"?
>
Are we not allowed to negate an expression
>
Or are we not allowed to assign an expression to a name.
>
Note, "Syntax Error", by its definition doesn't look at Semantics,
>>>
On 5/21/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-05-20 17:48:40 +0000, olcott said:
>> True(English, "a cat is an animal) is true
>> LP := ~True(L, LP) expands to ~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))
>
> No, it doesn't. It is a syntax error to have the same symbol on
> both sides ":=" so the expansion is not justified.
But it isn't.
>
*which rejects p defined as ~True(L, p) as a syntax error*
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.