Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method

On 5/15/24 9:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 5/13/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/13/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote:

>
Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p) is BY DEFINITION a truth bearer, as True must return a Truth Value for all inputs, and ~ a truth valus is always the other truth value.
>

>
Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied to expressions
that are stipulated to be true derive p?

 On 5/15/2024 8:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > Which has NOTHING to do with the problem with True(L, p)
 > being true when p is defined in L as ~True(L, p)
 *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT True(L, p) IS FALSE*

No, I said that because there is not path to p, it would need to be false, but that was based on the assumption that it could exist.

>
No, so True(L, p) is false
and thus ~True(L, p) is true.
>

>
Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied to expressions
that are stipulated to be true derive ~p?

>

 On 5/15/2024 7:52 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
 > Which has NOTHING to do with the above,
 > as we never refered to False(L,p).
 *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT false(L, p) IS FALSE*

Right, but that has nothing to do with the problem with True(L, p) being false, because, since p in L is ~True(L, p) so that make True(L, ~false) which is True(L, true) false, which is incorrrect.

>
No, so False(L, p) is false,
>

 Please try and keep these two thoughts together at the same time
*I need to make another point that depends on both of them*
 *YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT True(L, p) IS FALSE*
*YOU ALREADY AGREED THAT false(L, p) IS FALSE*
 

right, by your definitions, True(L, p) is False, but that means that True(L, true) is false, so your system is broken.
That or ~false isn't true, so you system is broken in a different way.
Until you show the problem with that logic, you are just trying to serve Herring with Red Sauce.