Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.theory > #139319
| From | olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.logic, comp.theory, sci.math, comp.ai.philosophy |
| Subject | Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along |
| Date | 2026-01-21 21:24 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10ks59j$2lpa5$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <10kqhcd$23pt6$2@dont-email.me> <10kqqh4$274n4$1@dont-email.me> <10kr7si$2bber$2@dont-email.me> <10krc3o$2dlfs$1@dont-email.me> <10krcvn$2dvc3$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 1/21/2026 2:29 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote: > On 21/01/2026 20:14, olcott wrote: >> On 1/21/2026 1:02 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote: >>> On 21/01/2026 15:14, olcott wrote: >>>> An BaseFact is an expression X of (natural or formal) >>>> language L that has been assigned the semantic property >>>> of True. (Similar to a math Axiom). >>> >>> Do you mean "statement" or really mean "expression" - understanding that >>> the term "expression" (of a language) includes things like "ngs lik" >>> from this statement. >>> >> >> It turns out that I must have remembered this from: >> >> *Russell’s Logical Atomism* >> the claim that the world consists of a plurality of >> independently existing things exhibiting qualities >> and standing in relations. According to logical >> atomism, all truths are ultimately dependent upon >> a layer of atomic facts, which consist either of a >> simple particular exhibiting a quality, or multiple >> simple particulars standing in a relation. >> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-atomism/ >> >> I bought his book a few decades ago. >> > > According to that link, Russel's 'expression' is more restrictive that > Haskell Curry's, Curry considered "ngs lik" to be an expression while > Russel is there said to consider "the King of France" to be an > expression, I suppose giving the two noun phrases as the only two > examples, as they do, is intended to exclude the supposition that "ngs > lik" is an expression, which Curry allows. I wonder whether Curry > misunderstood or adopted/formed a second school. > If you are only going to play head games you will be ignored. It turns out the wellfounded proof theoretic semantics is the key frame-of-reference that proves I have been correct about all of these things all along. When we anchor Wittgenstein this way he too was right all along 'True in Russell's system' means, as was said: proved in Russell's system; and 'false in Russell's system' means: the opposite has been proved in Russell's system https://www.liarparadox.org/Wittgenstein.pdf is exactly wellfounded proof theoretic semantics -- Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br> My 28 year goal has been to make <br> "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br> reliably computable.<br><br> This required establishing a new foundation<br>
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2026-01-19 11:56 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 00:29 -0500
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-20 12:13 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-20 23:00 -0500
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-20 22:49 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-01-21 07:38 -0500
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-21 09:14 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 19:02 +0000
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-21 14:14 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-21 21:24 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2026-01-22 07:42 -0500
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-01-22 10:43 -0600
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2026-01-22 19:13 -0500
Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 18:55 +0000
csiph-web