Path: csiph.com!xmission!news.alt.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 22:33:15 -0500 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3a_Simply_defining_G=c3=b6del_Incompleteness_and_Tarsk?= =?UTF-8?Q?i_Undefinability_away_V33_=28Mendelson_Satisfiability=29?= Newsgroups: comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai.nat-lang,sci.lang.semantics References: <87tuxseg31.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87wo2ocrss.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87r1swcr6l.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87lfj3d2fn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87ft9bd1nz.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87a6zjcu95.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <874kprcno2.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87h7trb36f.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87pn8e9vj3.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <87a6zh99n7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> From: olcott Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 22:33:15 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: Lines: 76 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-hZXXiu5PJjGqHmj5ftEjOxBcR/CWtpkkAcfvaCX7CUqb5CVfEhNnTrtVhhJKsnbTL5SSovivk4BOKj6!XSi9oOF7Oa1PeGEKp2of2OKIfOlUDNVrl1bL7dR9MuH1lyx/XvUNTrECKlRKRZ1/RFLXu3CdrCs= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 4488 Xref: csiph.com comp.theory:22072 comp.ai.philosophy:22236 comp.ai.nat-lang:2587 On 7/31/2020 6:58 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: > On 2020-07-31 09:48, olcott wrote: >> On 7/29/2020 10:55 PM, André G. Isaak wrote: >>> On 2020-07-29 21:50, André G. Isaak wrote: >>>> On 2020-07-29 20:44, olcott wrote: >>>> >>>>> If someone arbitrarily divides syntax from semantics then they have >>>>> to be put back together to have meaning. I wouldn't dived them in >>>>> the fist place. >>>> >>>> That's because you don't really grasp the distinction. >>>> >>>> Since you seem to like computer code better than math, consider the >>>> following C function: >>>> >>>> int foo(int x) { >>>>      return x % 12; >>>> } >>> >>> Scratch that. I meant: >>> >>>  > int foo(int x, int y) { >>>  >      return (x + y) % 12; >>>  > } >>> >> >> Within the "c" programming language the interpretation is hard-coded >> into the syntax. The ordered pair of <0...sizeof(x), 0...sizeof(y)> >> maps to a set of integer values. >> >>> [the point could probably be made with the original as well, but that >>> wasn't what I intended]. >>> >>> André >>> >>>> >>>> What exactly does the above function do? >>>> >>>> Your answer will almost certainly be one possible interpretation of >>>> this function, but there are others. If you answer the above >>>> question, I will illustrate this. >>>> >>>> André >>>> >> >> There is only a single correct intepretation. > > foo(10, 4) returns 2 What I am saying is that the fact that it returns "1" on <10, 4> is as aspect of its semantics. It is possible (based on Rudolf Carnap meaning Postulates) to conceive of a functionally all knowing mind that does not actually know the meaning of a single word. It creates the equivalent of semantics entirely syntactically. This is the most fundamental architecture of strong AI. > > But what exactly that means depends on the programmer's intent. > > Does that mean 10 o'clock plus four hours equals two o’clock? > > or does it mean that October plus four months equals February? > > or something else entirely? > > There is no single 'correct' interpretation. > > André > > -- Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott