Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.theory > #21460

Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 (axiomatic basis of truth)

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/5/2020 5:28 PM, David Kleinecke wrote:
> On Sunday, July 5, 2020 at 2:08:57 PM UTC-7, olcott wrote:
>>
>> The strong version says that language determines thought and that
>> linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
>>
>> In order to use the term "incompleteness" correctly and not as misnomer
>> (relative to its common meaning) a thing must be lacking some part.
>>
>> incomplete[ in-kuhm-pleet ] adjective not complete; lacking some part.
>> https://www.dictionary.com/browse/incomplete
>   
> The point of view (Hilbert's) where this started was that every true
> fact was provable. That is, what was being contemplated was the set
> of all provable propositions. The set was complete - all were there.
> Then Goedel showed that that there were propositions that were true
> but not provable. Obviously that meant the original set was not
> complete - that is, it was incomplete.

 > Then Goedel showed that that there were propositions that were true
 > but not provable.

He could not have possibly shown this because the lack of provability 
makes the expression unsound thus untrue.

Unless you start with
premises known to be true (or axioms essentially stipulated to be true)

and have
a complete inference chain from these premises (or a formal proof)

to the conclusion (or consequence) then the whole

argument (or WFF) is

unsound (or untrue).

The sound deducive inference model forms the correct axiomatic basis of 
truth.

> 
>> When we say that a formal system is incomplete(common) we are saying
>> that it can't do something that it is supposed to do because something
>> is missing.
>>
>> The membership algorithm decides whether or not an arbitrary finite
>> string is a theorem of its formal system. The membership algorithm has
>> its rules-of-inference, axioms and syntactic validation integrated
>> together as a single process.
>   
> That is, all the interesting intellectual content is shoved into
> the WFF membership test. This is not what people mean by a formal
> system.
> 

It is the the notion of a formal system that would implement the 
axiomatic basis of truth.

-- 
Copyright 2020 Pete Olcott

Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-04 11:36 -0500
  Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-04 12:21 -0600
    Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-04 16:28 -0500
      Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 07:17 -0600
        Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 10:31 -0500
          Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 10:28 -0600
            Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 11:42 -0500
              Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 10:53 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 13:38 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 12:44 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 13:56 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 13:16 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 15:25 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 14:46 -0600
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 16:08 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2020-07-05 15:28 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 17:50 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 (axiomatic basis of truth) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-07-05 17:13 -0700
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 (axiomatic basis of truth) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 20:37 -0500
                Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 (axiomatic basis of truth) André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2020-07-05 20:46 -0600
    Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-04 17:39 -0500
    Re: Simply defining Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability away V21 olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2020-07-05 13:15 -0500

csiph-web