Re: Undecidability based on epistemological antinomies V2

On 4/18/24 1:57 AM, olcott wrote:

On 4/17/2024 9:34 PM, olcott wrote:
"...14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar undecidability proof..." (Gödel 1931:43-44)
 is literally true whether or not Gödel meant it literally. Since it <is> literally true I am sure that he did mean it literally.
 

*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.
>

 It is easy to understand that self-contradictory mean unprovable and irrefutable, thus meeting the definition of Incomplete(F).

Right, which is why Godel's G is NOT a "self-contradictory" statement.
You don't even understand the meaning of "Incomplete" here, as a self-contradictory statement, and thus a statement which is neither true or false, says nothing about incompleteness, since incompleteness is only about the ability to prove or disprove truth bearers.
Note, since your "Parphrased" statement is an INCORRECT restatement of the statement that Godel made (maybe the best you know, but you are still incorrect) your whole logic falls down.
The fact that you REFUSE to look at the facts pointed out to you, just prove why people believe things that are not true, it isn't a failing of the logic system, but a refusal of some people (like you) to actually look at the truth.
Of course, since "The Truth" is what run this universe, rejecting it causes the person rejecting it to be in a very bad place, even if they don't realize it yet.,

 

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