Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
| From | Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.logic |
| Subject | Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along |
| Date | 2026-01-21 20:29 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10krcvn$2dvc3$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <10kplsj$1r5sj$1@dont-email.me> <10kqhcd$23pt6$2@dont-email.me> <10kqqh4$274n4$1@dont-email.me> <10kr7si$2bber$2@dont-email.me> <10krc3o$2dlfs$1@dont-email.me> |
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. -- Tristan Wibberley The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may, of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.
Back to sci.logic | 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 Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-01-21 20:29 +0000
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> - 2026-01-23 04:43 +0000
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