Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai.nat-lang,sci.lang.semantics Subject: Re: Simply defining =?utf-8?Q?G=C3=B6del?= Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V31 (Semantically Incorrect Defined) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 11:59:31 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 28 Message-ID: <87365mui5o.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <871rl8dyg1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87lfjfovhm.fsf@bsb.me.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0cafe64f224105d544a81552e24cedc1"; logging-data="22429"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX182pZ240DYt6ib5UnNRyFUb" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:m6mFyEtXsmnYR2lzF5R1j+CGW1I= sha1:F9aMp8D8kBdwkpaSwBZ9KFsfHdg= Xref: csiph.com comp.theory:21823 comp.ai.philosophy:22157 comp.ai.nat-lang:2515 olcott writes: > On 7/20/2020 12:15 AM, André G. Isaak wrote: >> On 2020-07-19 22:52, olcott wrote: >>> Here is the formalization of the sentence: "This sentence is a theorem" >>> φ ↔ ⊢φ >> >> That isn't a formalization of 'this sentence is a theorem'. It is a >> statement about some other formula, φ, which you have not given an >> interpretation. > > Like the liar Paradox and Gödel's > We are therefore confronted with a proposition which asserts > its own unprovability.15 > The truth teller paradox has no interpretation. Its meaning is vacuous. Do you understand that φ ↔ ⊢φ is *not* a formalization of "this sentence is a theorem? That nothing in that formula means "this sentence"? Yes or no, please. [...] -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */