Liste des Groupes | Revenir à s logic |
On 2024-07-30 13:40:55 +0000, olcott said:Quine got totally confused by synonymity. He never understood
On 7/30/2024 2:33 AM, Mikko wrote:You cannot redefine side wihout redefining the other side and theOn 2024-07-29 00:44:41 +0000, olcott said:>
>The truth about every expression of language that can be known>
to be true on the basis of its meaning expressed in language is
that a lack of connection simply means untrue.
Does that really mean something? If the significance of the lack of
connection is restricted to sentences where the connection exists
then it seems that you are talking about nothing.
>
https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/analytic-synthetic/
I had to redefine the analytic side of the analytic/synthetic
distinction because Quine convinced most everyone that this
distinction does not exist.
distinction itself. Is your redefinition equivalent to the one
at https://plato.stanford.edu/Entries/analytic-synthetic/ or did
you find out that that distincition is not the one that exists?
It must mean something like slapping yourself in the face right?Every expression x of (formal or natural) language L thatThat does not mean anything aunless you define "truth preserving
can be connected to the its semantic meaning in L by a
sequence of truth preserving operations is true in L.
The same thing applies to ~x making x false in L.
operations" and how they connect semantic meanings to expressions.
It is a tautology. Expressions that can only be shownWhen x and ~x are both unprovable in L then x is not aCan you prove that every expression that is true in L by your definition
truth-bearer in L.
is provable by the rules of L?
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.