Sujet : Re: Gödel's Basic Logic Course at Notre Dame (Was: Analytic Truth-makers)
De : janburse (at) *nospam* fastmail.fm (Mild Shock)
Groupes : comp.theory sci.logicDate : 24. Jul 2024, 21:33:25
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <v7roel$9t9k$1@solani.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.18.2
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.pdfolcott 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.