Sujet : Re: Gödel's Basic Logic Course at Notre Dame (Was: Analytic Truth-makers)
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 24. Jul 2024, 22:45:17
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v7rp4t$1sv5t$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/24/2024 3:33 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
But truth bearer has another meaning.
The more correct terminology is anyway
truth maker, you have to shift away the
focus from the formula and think it is
a truth bearer, this is anyway wrong,
since you have two additional parameters
your "True" and your language "L".
So all that we see here in expression such as:
[~] True(L, [~] A)
Is truth making, and not truth bearing.
In recent years truth making has received
some attention, there are interesting papers
concerning truth makers. And it has
even a SEP article:
Truthmakers
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truthmakers/
A world of truthmakers?
https://philipp.philosophie.ch/handouts/2005-5-5-truthmakers.pdf
olcott schrieb:
The key difference is that we no long use the misnomer
"undecidable" sentence and instead call it for what it
really is an expression that is not a truth bearer, or
proposition in L.
A truth-bearer is any expression of language that can
be true or false. Self-contradictory expressions are not
truth bearers.
-- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…