Re: Mathematical incompleteness has always been a misconception --- Tarski

On 02/10/2025 09:32 PM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

On 11/02/2025 03:19, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>

We live in a yellow submarine, just yellower and yellower.

>
The Comenius language that Comenius posits, is also
like Leibniz' universal language, which also he posits,

>
Language is a tool in Leibniz, not the primary thing.
<https://seprogrammo.blogspot.com/2024/01/on-logic-of-it.html>
>
Indeed, all you keep spouting is rather anti-Leibniz.
Not per chance, in this empire of fundamental inversions.
>

like Nietzsche's eternal text, which he bemoans its
absence, and like Quine in Word & Object, ignores.
>
A footnote in Quine refers to Russell's inconstancy,
or mere generously, development, with regards to
"never knowing what he is talking about".
>
Nietzsche as well had a later greater return
to Platonism, though it was much less promoted
since logical positivists of a particular formal
variety don't care for it.
>
Then the pre-geometric (technical, mathematical, ideal)
and pre-scientific (technical, scientific, analytical)
have that Derrida for Husserl very much has it so
part of the Lebenswelt, which we inhabit.
>
(analytical)

>
I once wrote a little word randomizer: given any text in
input, it spit out prose that was more honest than yours.

 You mentioned "inversions", it's considered primary,
the inversion, more primary than contradiction.