• Re: This makes all Analytic(Olcott) truth computable --- True(L,x) defi

    From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Tue Aug 20 22:32:10 2024
    On 8/20/24 10:07 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 8/20/2024 5:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-19 12:48:08 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/19/2024 3:07 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-18 12:18:02 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/15/2024 4:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-13 12:43:16 +0000, olcott said:


    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition >>>>>>> is a proposition that is known to be true by understanding its
    meaning
    without proof https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    Self-evident propositions are uninteresting.


    It turns out that self-evident <is> the notion of {analytic truth}
    and all of math and logic only deals in {analytic truth}.

    A large part of what math and logic deals in is not self-evident.
    For examle, most people would not regard it self-evident that in
    classical geometry it is impossible to construct a square that
    has the same area as a given circle.


    By self-evident I do not mean that people can understand it.
    I only mean that it is semantically entailed by a set of axioms.
    A better term than self-evident is semantic tautology.

    Which dictionary has that as the first meaning of "self-evident"?


    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    I am establishing it as Analytic(Olcott) when I define
    the predicate True(L,x):

    Unless expression x has a connection (through a sequence
    of true preserving operations) in system F to its semantic
    meanings expressed in language L of F then x is simply
    untrue in F.

    Whenever there is no sequence of truth preserving from
    x or ~x to its meaning in L of F then x has no truth-maker
    in F and x not a truth-bearer in F. We never get to x is
    undecidable in F.




    And this is part of your problem, as it isn't applicable to Formal
    Systems as they have clearly defined meanings for what is "True" and
    what is "Known".

    The Formalism of the system gets around the problems that epistemology
    tries to handle.

    Also, the Analytic/Synthetic distinction doesn't apply to Formal
    Systems, as "observation" isn't a source of truth in a Formal System,
    only what derives from the rules of the system.

    But then, you never really understood what Formal Systems are, and how
    they are NOT tied to "the real world" at all, and thus not really
    applicable to your idea of truth detecting.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mikko@21:1/5 to olcott on Wed Aug 21 11:30:19 2024
    On 2024-08-20 14:07:36 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/20/2024 5:30 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-19 12:48:08 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/19/2024 3:07 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-18 12:18:02 +0000, olcott said:

    On 8/15/2024 4:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 2024-08-13 12:43:16 +0000, olcott said:


    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition >>>>>>> is a proposition that is known to be true by understanding its meaning >>>>>>> without proof https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    Self-evident propositions are uninteresting.


    It turns out that self-evident <is> the notion of {analytic truth}
    and all of math and logic only deals in {analytic truth}.

    A large part of what math and logic deals in is not self-evident.
    For examle, most people would not regard it self-evident that in
    classical geometry it is impossible to construct a square that
    has the same area as a given circle.


    By self-evident I do not mean that people can understand it.
    I only mean that it is semantically entailed by a set of axioms.
    A better term than self-evident is semantic tautology.

    Which dictionary has that as the first meaning of "self-evident"?


    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    Which is very different from what you said above.

    --
    Mikko

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