Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/16/2024 9:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:So why did you argue that True(L, true) shouldn't be just true?On 5/16/24 9:59 AM, olcott wrote:*True by definition must actually be true*On 5/16/2024 6:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 5/16/24 12:44 AM, olcott wrote:>On 5/15/2024 9:33 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 5/15/24 10:17 PM, olcott wrote:>On 5/15/2024 9:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>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.
>
You understand that True(English, "a fish") is false
and you understand that False(English, "a fish") is false
and you understand this means that "a fish" is neither True
nor false in English.
>
You understand that the actual Liar Paradox is neither true
nor false *THIS IS MUCH MUCH BETTER THAN MOST PEOPLE: Good Job*
>
True(English, "This sentence is not true") is false
False(English, "This sentence is not true") is false
Is saying the same thing that you already know.
>
You get stuck when we formalize: "This sentence is not true"
as "p defined as ~True(L, p)", yet the formalized sentence has
the exact same semantics as the English one.
>
No, YOU get stuck when you can't figure out how to make True(L, p) with p defined in L as ~True(L, p) work. If it IS false, then the resulting comclusion is that True(L, true) is false, whicn means your system is broken.
>
True(L, true) is false
False(L, true) is false
>
This is the Truth Teller Paradox
and is rejected as not a truth bearer.
>
>
No True(L, true) must be TRUE by definiition.
We could say that "kittens are fifteen story office buildings"
is true by definition and we would be wrong.
But the fundamental definition of true makes it true.
*True by definition must actually be true*
*True by definition must actually be true*
No, it is the VALUE of the result of this algorithm, which, BY DEFINITION, is a truth value.*No it is not, it is the result of this algorithm*>>
"True(L, true)" lacks a truth object that it is true about.
A sentence cannot correctly be true about being true...
It has to be true about something other than itself.
true IS the fundamental truth object.
>
*No it is not, it is the result of this algorithm*
*No it is not, it is the result of this algorithm*
*The grounding of a truth-bearer to its truthmaker*Which, by your claim makes True(L, p) false, but that makes p to be defined as ~false, which is true, so you are claiming True(L, true) can be false.
True(L,x) returns true when x is derived from a set of truth preserving operations from finite string expressions of language that have been stipulated to have the semantic value of Boolean true. False(L,x) is defined as True(L,~x). Copyright 2022 PL Olcott
So, are you agreeing that True(L, true) needs to be true?It isn't a "sentence" it is a truth value.That is how Kripke defined not a truth-bearer.
>
You are just showing you don't actually understand how logic works.
>>>
"This sentence has five words."
Is true about the number of words that it has.
True(English, "This sentence has five words.") is true
>
"a sentence may fail to make a statement if it is
paradoxical or ungrounded."
>
So, you thing truth is just paradoxical or ungrounded?
>
I specified what grounding means above and previously.
*Outline of a Theory of Truth --- Saul Kripke*
https://www.impan.pl/~kz/truthseminar/Kripke_Outline.pdf
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.