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

On 2/25/25 3:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/25/2025 9:40 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-02-24 22:44:03 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 2/24/2025 3:04 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-02-22 17:41:40 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 2/22/2025 3:15 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-02-21 23:19:10 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 2/20/2025 2:54 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-02-18 03:59:08 +0000, olcott said:
>

>

>
Tarski anchored his whole proof in the Liar Paradox.

>
More specifically, to the idea that the Liar Paradox does not have a
truth value. Do you reject that idea?

>
This was not what Tarski was saying.

>
Yes, he was. He just assumed that his readers already know that the
Liar Paradox does not have a truth value so he didn't need to be
emphatically explicit about that point.

>
In other words you never read this:
https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_275_276.pdf

>
Did you? Nowhere on those pages he claims that the Liar paradox is true
nor that the Liar paradox is false.
>

 We shall show that the sentence x is actually undecidable and at the same time true.
 https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_247_248.pdf

Care to show where on that page it says what you said it says?
Of course, this is just your typical lying about what someone has said and putting words in their mouths to try tp prove your point, but instead just prove that you are nothing but a lair.
I think you are misapplying your own definitions to try to read into what he says what you want it to say so you can disprove it.
In other words, you lie about it to put your strawman into it.

 

On what page and line did Tarski say anything that could justfy
the claim you made above?
>