1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.LOGIC

  • =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_Defeating_Tarski_Undefinability_and_G=C3=B6del_1931?= =

    From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Sat Dec 16 21:51:06 2023
    On 12/16/23 9:23 PM, olcott wrote:
    *This is true by definition* Within the body of analytical truth of the analytic/synthetic distinction every element of the body of analytic knowledge (BOAK) is true entirely on the basis of its connection to the semantic meanings that make it true.

    And that includes INFINITE level of connections.

    Remember, "Sementic" in logic does NOT mean "By the meaning of the words themselves".



    This proves that Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness and Tarski's Undefinability Theorem cannot apply to the body of analytical knowledge (BOAK). Lacking
    this connection excludes an expression from the BOAK, thus undecidable expressions cannot exist within the BOAK.


    Nope., It prove you don't understand what you are talking about.


    True(x) is defined by the above, within the BOAK thus refuting Tarski.

    Nope, you don't understand what Tarski means by "definition of Truth:.


    Every element of the BOAK has a provability connection to its semantic meanings truthmaker within the BOAK thus refuting both Tarski and Gödel
    that say this cannot correctly and consistently accomplished.


    Nope. "Provable" means has a finite length connection string.

    True allows for infinite length conection string.

    This has been explaid to you before, but in your inabiity to learn, you
    have ignored it, making you just an idiotic liar and prove your stupidity.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Sun Dec 17 12:39:18 2023
    On 12/17/23 12:32 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/17/2023 3:06 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2023-12-17 02:23:12 +0000, olcott said:

    *This is true by definition* Within the body of analytical truth of the
    analytic/synthetic distinction every element of the body of analytic
    knowledge (BOAK) is true entirely on the basis of its connection to the
    semantic meanings that make it true.

    This proves that Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness and Tarski's Undefinability >>> Theorem cannot apply to the body of analytical knowledge (BOAK). Lacking >>> this connection excludes an expression from the BOAK, thus undecidable
    expressions cannot exist within the BOAK.

    True(x) is defined by the above, within the BOAK thus refuting Tarski.

    Every element of the BOAK has a provability connection to its semantic
    meanings truthmaker within the BOAK thus refuting both Tarski and Gödel >>> that say this cannot correctly and consistently accomplished.

    Tarski and Gödel don't claim that the arithmetic of natural numbers
    is a part of BOAK as defined above. Therefore your argument does not
    apply.

    It is a verified fact that arithmetic is an aspect of the body of
    analytical knowledge (BOAK) and anyone claiming otherwise is incorrect
    in the absolute sense.

    They are incorrect in the same sense that when they claim that the
    integer 5 is not a number it is actually a sinking motor boat.


    Then, in your body of analytic knowledge is the true statement that
    there exists statements in the system the BOAK exists in that are true
    and unprovable.

    It also says that your BOAK has in it the statement that there exists statements that we can not determine if they are true or false or
    non-sense, since we can not have a "Definition of Truth" as defined by
    Tarski. (a finite procedure that determines in finite time if a given
    statement is True or not)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)