Re: Can there be a truth without a truthmaker?

Op 06.apr.2024 om 16:01 schreef olcott:

On 4/6/2024 3:16 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 06.apr.2024 om 07:40 schreef Lawrence D'Oliveiro:

On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 23:44:55 -0500, olcott wrote:
>

On 4/5/2024 8:26 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 18:57:44 -0500, olcott wrote:
>

There are only two kinds of truth:
(a) Analytic truth where expressions of language are true on the basis
of their meaning. Example: "All dogs are animals."
>
(b) Empirical truth, expressions of language that rely on sense data
from the sense organs. Example: "There is a dog in my living room
right now."

>
Which kind of truth is that statement?

>
Everything that can be encoded using language is analytic.

>
You said “There are only two kinds of truth”. If that is true, then which
kind of “truth” is it?

I have similar questions. It seems to be an axiom. Do axioms have a truth value? Are they true by definition, but only within a certain analytical system? Could they be false/untrue in other systems? If so, about which system is olcott talking?

 Cats are animals is an axiom of natural language.
The Cyc project uses 128-bit GUIDs in place of words
that give each sense meaning of a word its own unique
identifier and accounts for the varied natural languages.
 

I try to read this as an answer to my questions, but without success.
Does olcott mean that the system I was asking for is the Cyc project?
And that these axioms are valid only within this project?
He adds another axiom: "Cats are animals is an axiom of natural language". Is that also within this system?
Natural language is often ambiguous, or metaphorical. E.g., the word "cat" is some times used for other things that are not animals. I don't see how natural language can be used as an analytical system.