Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
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 V24 (Membership algorithm)
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:01:46 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 53
Message-ID: <87pn8tws91.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <u8KdneInk71rAp_CnZ2dnUU7-bPNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875zapk0bb.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <zsCdncdz36GK7ZPCnZ2dnUU7-S_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87lfjkixu6.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <neidnU7COZFyr5LCnZ2dnUU7-XnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <renekb$d4h$1@dont-email.me> <Bt6dnbCdOYJYBpLCnZ2dnUU7-NnNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y2nkguqv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <JcSdneV2x50wWJLCnZ2dnUU7-WXNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87h7u7h54e.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <8rKdnZAbAoVsOo3CnZ2dnUU7-efNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87wo33ey8d.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <m6-dnYY3_v4Lm4zCnZ2dnUU7-K3NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87lfjig8b1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <cs2dnaqdvJRYtYzCnZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87ft9qfmxh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <L9adneBYOuP_UIzCnZ2dnUU7-I_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <20200717111547.679@kylheku.com> <Co2dnUujssMEtY_CnZ2dnUU7-V_NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87zh7xwxle.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <I_Cdncs9EO90q4_CnZ2dnUU7-TvNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="dffee613090862573c3f5f5fc498430c"; logging-data="10295"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/DHG2VFthHbwT6orug1Mcd"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+ZbApAp2nOPzhc7PyTstFBtOj20= sha1:L6eL/IRd+BPyiywpbS4XQWFPGAk=
Xref: csiph.com comp.theory:21768 comp.ai.philosophy:22107 comp.ai.nat-lang:2475

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
> On 7/17/2020 6:06 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
[SNIP]
>> What Gödel proved, if I understand correctly, is that <HANDWAVE>if a
>> theory is expressive enough that it can actually have self-contradictory
>> expressions, then it *is* either incomplete or inconsistent</HANDWAVE>.
>> (Perhaps someone else can restate that in more formal and/or accurate
>> terms.)
>
> They would hate the way that you said it, yet you said the way that it
> really is.

By "they", I presume you mean the other participants in these
discussions.  I'd be interested in their opinions of my summary.

But I think you just admitted that any sufficiently expressive theory
is either incomplete or inconsistent.  Is that really what you mean?
(Yes or no, please.)

>> I have asked you a number of times whether it's the way the *word*
>> "incomplete" is defined that you have a problem with, and whether using
>> a different word for the concept that "there is some sentence φ such
>> that (T ⊬ φ) and (T ⊬ ¬φ)".  Once you divorce that concept from the
>> baggage of the English meaning of "incomplete", do you still have a
>> problem with Gödel's proof?
>>
>> It's rather telling, I think, that you haven't answered that.
>
> If we called a formal system "super doodle" on the basis that it could
> not prove that lies are true, I would be OK with that.
>
> If we call a formal system "incomplete" on the basis that it cannot
> prove that lies are True, I have a big problem with that.

PAY ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING.  I'VE WRITTEN IT SEVERAL TIMES AND
YOU HAVE IGNORED IT.

If I ask you a yes or no question, I request that you include
the word "yes" or "no" in your answer, preferably at or near the
beginning -- or explain why neither "yes" nor "no" would be an
appropriate answer.  If you fail to do that, I will IGNORE your
answer.  If you think that's unreasonable, feel free to explain why.

I actually had some things to say about what you wrote above,
but I'll keep them to myself.

For someone who posts so many words, you seem singularly uninterested
in communicating.

-- 
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 */