Re: Undecidability based on epistemological antinomies V2

On 4/17/2024 10:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 4/17/24 10:34 PM, olcott wrote:

...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof...(Gödel 1931:43-44)
>
*Parphrased as*
Every expression X that cannot possibly be true or false proves that the
formal system F cannot correctly determine whether X is true or false.
Which shows that X is undecidable in F.

 Nope.
 Just more of your LIES and STUPIDITY.
 

>
Which shows that F is incomplete, even though X cannot possibly be a
proposition in F because propositions must be true or false.

 But that ISN'T the definition of "Incomplete", so you are just LYING.
 Godel showed that a statment, THAT WAS TRUE, couldn't be proven in F.
 You don't even seem to understand what the statement G actually is, because all you look at are the "clift notes" versions, and don't even understand that.
 Remember, G is a statement about the non-existance of a number that has a specific property. Until you understand that, your continued talking about this is just more LIES and DECIET, proving your absoulute STUPIDITY.
 

>
A proposition is a central concept in the philosophy of language,
semantics, logic, and related fields, often characterized as the primary
bearer of truth or falsity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposition
>

 Right, and if you don't know what the proposition is that you are arguing about, you are just proven to be a stupid liar.
 

If you are going to continue to be mean and call me names I will stop
talking to you. Even if you stop being mean and stop calling me names
if you continue to dogmatically say that I am wrong without pointing
out all of the details of my error, I will stop talking to you.
This is either a civil debate and an honest dialogue or you will
hear nothing form me.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer