Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.logic > #334615

Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement)

From Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups sci.logic
Subject Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement)
Date 2024-05-27 17:19 +0300
Organization -
Message-ID <v324pa$2rt4$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (27 earlier) <v2t9ne$2vna0$5@dont-email.me> <v2usea$3be7o$1@dont-email.me> <v2veqj$3e8pb$1@dont-email.me> <v31eit$3ugn4$1@dont-email.me> <v324iu$2pkb$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On 2024-05-27 14:15:57 +0000, olcott said:

> On 5/27/2024 3:00 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-05-26 13:52:17 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 5/26/2024 3:38 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-25 18:13:02 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 5/25/2024 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-05-24 19:16:47 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 5/24/2024 3:18 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-23 13:32:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 5/23/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-23 01:03:44 +0000, Richard Damon said:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/24 7:55 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 6:01 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/24 3:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 11:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-22 15:55:39 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/22/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-21 14:36:29 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/21/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-20 17:48:40 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/20/2024 2:55 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-19 14:15:51 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2024 9:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-19 13:41:56 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/19/2024 6:55 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 11:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 6:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 6:47 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 5:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 4:00 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 2:57 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 3:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 12:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 1:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 11:56 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 12:48 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 9:32 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/24 10:15 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/18/2024 7:43 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, your system contradicts itself.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have never shown this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The most you have shown is a lack of understanding of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Truth Teller Paradox.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, I have, but you don't understand the proof, it seems because you 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't know what a "Truth Predicate" has been defined to be.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My True(L,x) predicate is defined to return true or false for every
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite string x on the basis of the existence of a sequence of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserving operations that derive x from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And thus, When True(L, p) established a sequence of truth preserving 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operations eminationg from ~True(L, p) by returning false, it 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradicts itself. The problem is that True, in making an answer of 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> false, has asserted that such a sequence exists.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > On 5/13/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> On 5/13/2024 7:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>> Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p) ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> to expressions that are stipulated to be true derive p?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > No, so True(L, p) is false
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> Can a sequence of true preserving operations applied
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> to expressions that are stipulated to be true derive ~p?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > No, so False(L, p) is false,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To help you concentrate I repeated this*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Liar Paradox and your formalized Liar Paradox both
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contradict themselves that is why they must be screened
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out as type mismatch error non-truth-bearers *BEFORE THAT OCCURS*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And the Truth Predicate isn't allowed to "filter" out expressions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT IT DOESN'T
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> WE HAVE BEEN OVER THIS AGAIN AND AGAIN
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> THE FORMAL SYSTEM USES THE TRUE AND FALSE PREDICATE
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TO FILTER OUT TYPE MISMATCH ERROR
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The first thing that the formal system does with any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arbitrary finite string input is see if it is a Truth-bearer:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, we can ask True(L, x) for any expression x and get an answer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The system is designed so you can ask this, yet non-truth-bearers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are rejected before True(L, x) is allowed to be called.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not allowed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My True(L,x) predicate is defined to return true or false for every
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finite string x on the basis of the existence of a sequence of truth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> preserving operations that derive x from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A set of finite string semantic meanings that form an accurate
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> verbal model of the general knowledge of the actual world that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> form a finite set of finite strings that are stipulated to have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the semantic value of Boolean true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is computable* Truthbearer(L,x) ≡ (True(L,x) ∨ True(L,~x))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, for a statement x to be false, it says that there must be a 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sequence of truth perserving operations that derive ~x from, right?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes we must build from mutual agreement, good.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So do you still say that for p defined in L as ~True(L, p) that your 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition will say that True(L, p) will return false?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is the perfectly isomorphic to this:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True(English, "This sentence is not true")
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope, Because "This sentece is not true" can be a non-truth-bearer, but 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by its definition, True(L, x) can not.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True(L,x) is always a truth bearer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when x is defined as True(L,x) then x is not a truth bearer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When x is defined as True(L,x) then x is what True(L,x) is,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in this case a truth bearer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is known as the Truth Teller Paradox
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't matter. But ir you say that "x is not a truth bearer" then,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by a truth preserving transformation, you imply that True(L,x) is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True(English, "a cat is an animal) is true
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP) expands to ~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it doesn't. It is a syntax error to have the same symbol on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both sides ":=" so the expansion is not justified.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ϕ(x) there is a sentence ψ such that S ⊢ ψ ↔ ϕ⟨ψ⟩.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *The sentence ψ is of course not self-referential in a strict sense*,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but mathematically it behaves like one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-reference/#ConSemPar
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your quote omitted important details. One is that the claim is not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> true about every theory but is about first order arithmetic and its
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extension. Another one is that ϕ(x) is that the claim is about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every formula ϕ(x).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *The whole article is about self-reference*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The ONLY detail that I am referring to is that it is conventional to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formalize self-reference incorrectly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Richard and both fixed that*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2024 9:31 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  > On 5/13/24 10:03 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >> On 5/13/2024 7:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  >>> Remember, p defined as ~True(L, p) ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> x := y means x is defined to be another name for y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another name for the meaning of y. Therefore any pair of sentences that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are otherwise equal but one contains x where rhe other contains y is a pair
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of equally true sentences. For example, if p defined as ~True(L, ⟨p⟩)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no idea what you mean by the weird ⟨p⟩ quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY FREAKING Gödel NUMBERS
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY FREAKING Gödel NUMBERS
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY FREAKING Gödel NUMBERS
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I AM TALKING ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OR NON-EXISTENCE OF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AN ACTUAL SEQUENCE OF TRUTH PRESERVING OPERATIONS FROM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EXPRESSIONS OF LANGUAGE KNOWN TO BE TRUE
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, you aren't talking about Tarski's proof of the impossibility to 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> define a Truth Predicate per his definition?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then Truthbearer(L,p) has the same truth value as Truthbearer(L,~True(L, ⟨p⟩)).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When p defined as ~True(L, p)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then ~True(L, p) is true, thus a truth-bearer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which means that True(L, p) is false, so your True just erred in 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> describing a true statement as false.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Remeber, you just said that ~True(L, p) which has been given the name 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of p IS a truth-bearer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> *You are just not paying close enough attention again*
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> When p defined as ~True(L, p)
>>>>>>>>>>>>  True(L,p)  is false
>>>>>>>>>>>>  True(L,~p) is false
>>>>>>>>>>>> ~True(L,~p) is true
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> x := y means x is defined to be another name for y
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logic_symbols
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Right, so since p is DEFINED to be ~True(L, p), which since True(L, p) 
>>>>>>>>>>> is false, must be true, that means that you are claiming that
>>>>>>>>>>> T(L, <a statement that has been shown to be true>) is false.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thus your True predicat is just broken.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> You ignored the part where Mikko agreed that
>>>>>>>>>>>>  p defined as ~True(L, p)
>>>>>>>>>>>> is a syntax error:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> So, what it the "Syntax Error"?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Are we not allowed to negate an expression
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Or are we not allowed to assign an expression to a name.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Note, "Syntax Error", by its definition doesn't look at Semantics,
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/21/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-05-20 17:48:40 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True(English, "a cat is an animal) is true
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP) expands to ~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, it doesn't. It is a syntax error to have the same symbol on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> both sides ":=" so the expansion is not justified.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> But it isn't.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> By the usual rules a definition of a symbol in terms of itself is not
>>>>>>>>>> an acceptable definition.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> One can either reject it as a syntax error or let it go ahead
>>>>>>>>> and infinitely expand and reject it as a semantic error.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It is a syntax error by the usual rules. If you want to use a different
>>>>>>>> syntax then you should specify one, preferably using a different symbol
>>>>>>>> instead of ":=". It is OK to extend the syntax but one should avoid any
>>>>>>>> conflict with the usual conventions. Also, if you change the syntax
>>>>>>>> rules you should not call it a "definition".
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP) is required to refer to itself on both sides
>>>>>>> that is what actual self-reference means.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> *THE ACTUAL Stanford ARTICLE ON SELF-REFERENCE SAYS*
>>>>>>> *THAT THEY MAKE SURE TO ENCODE IS INCORRECTLY*
>>>>>>> ϕ(x) there is a sentence ψ such that S ⊢ ψ ↔ ϕ⟨ψ⟩.
>>>>>>> *The sentence ψ is of course not self-referential in a strict sense*,
>>>>>>> but mathematically it behaves like one.
>>>>>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-reference/#ConSemPar
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It is the standard convention throughout the literature to encode
>>>>>>> self-reference incorrectly. When the standard convention is to do
>>>>>>> these things incorrectly then the standard convention must be
>>>>>>> superseded and replaced.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That is one of the reasons what correctly analyzing these this is
>>>>>>> so difficult.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If you are correct that this is incorrect syntax
>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP)
>>>>>>> that is yet another reason to reject the Liar Paradox
>>>>>>> (and every other self-reference paradox) as ill-formed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Or one can reject is as a self-contradictory epistemological antinomy
>>>>>>>>> having no truth value thus a type mismatch error for any formal
>>>>>>>>> system of bivalent logic.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If that can be formulated as a syntax rule. Being an epistemological
>>>>>>>> antinomy is semantics as is being true or false but type mismach can
>>>>>>>> be handled as syntax error if the syntax rules have a type system.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The formalized Liar Paradox
>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP) <is> an epistemological antinomy because assuming
>>>>>>> that it is true makes it false and assuming that it is false makes it
>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That you want to also call it a syntax error seems reasonable to me.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If it is not rejected as a syntax error then it does recursively
>>>>>>> expand ~True(~True(~True(~True(~True(...))))) as Clocksin & Mellish
>>>>>>> point out.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> BEGIN:(Clocksin & Mellish 2003:254)
>>>>>>>    equal(X, X).
>>>>>>>    ?- equal(foo(Y), Y).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>    that is, they will allow you to match a term against an uninstantiated
>>>>>>>    subterm of itself. In this example, foo(Y) is matched against Y, which
>>>>>>>    appears within it. As a result, Y will stand for foo(Y), which is
>>>>>>>    foo(foo(Y)) (because of what Y stands for), which is foo(foo(foo(Y))),
>>>>>>>    and so on. So Y ends up standing for some kind of infinite structure.
>>>>>>> END:(Clocksin & Mellish 2003:254)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Most of the greatest experts in the field are not even sure
>>>>>>>>> that there is anything wrong with it.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nothing is inherently wrong in an uninterpreted formal system.
>>>>>>>> Something may be unsuitable for some purpose but still useful
>>>>>>>> for another purpose.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You already said that this is a syntax error:
>>>>>>> LP := ~True(L, LP)
>>>>>>> please at least be consistent with yourself.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't. Because of a syntax error "LP := ~True(L, LP)" is not an
>>>>>> expression in the formal system and not in contradiction that there
>>>>>> is nothing wrong in the formal system.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> This is where Tarski says that his proof is anchored in the Liar Paradox
>>>>> https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_247_248.pdf
>>>> 
>>>> Nothing to that page contradicts anything I have said above.
>>>> 
>>>>> When you look at my new thread (and completely understand what it says)
>>>>> You will see when we correctly formalize Tarski's clumsy formalization
>>>>> of the Liar Paradox
>>>> 
>>>> You don't formalize it correctly with a string that is not in the
>>>> language of the formnal system. A syntax error excludes all meaning
>>>> and in prticular the meaning that Tarksi's expressions have.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Back in 2019 I created a formal system for this purpose:
>>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331859461_Minimal_Type_Theory_YACC_BNF
>>> 
>>> Initially it took any MTT expression and output the directed graph
>>> of the evaluation sequence of this expression. The current system
>>> only outputs the XML of the expression yet the directed graph can
>>> still be derived manually.
>> 
>> Users of your MTT basically need two programs: one that checks whether
>> the input is syntactiaclly correct and identifies at least one error
>> if it is not, and one that checks whether a proof (that may but need
>> not have unproven premises) is valid and identifies at least one error
>> if it is not.
>> 
> 
> MTT is build with YACC and LEX and outputs the XML of the
> input expression.
> 
> LP := ~True(L, LP)
> 
> definition_2  token="ASSIGN_ALIAS"
> | definition_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="LP"
> | sentence_2  token="NOT"
> | | atomic_sentence_1  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="True"
> | | | term_list_1
> | | | | term_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="L"
> | | | | term_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="LP"
> 
> Directed graph of evaulation sequence of LP
> Nodes on the left edges on the right
> 00 NOT   01
> 01 True   02, 00  // cycle
> 02 L
> 
> <definition_2  token="ASSIGN_ALIAS">
>   <definition_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="LP"/>
>   <sentence_2  token="NOT">
>    <atomic_sentence_1  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="True">
>     <term_list_1>
>      <term_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="L"/>
>      <term_2  token="IDENTIFIER"  value="LP"/>
>     </term_list_1>
>    </atomic_sentence_1>
>   </sentence_2>
> </definition_2>

That is not far from useful. Much of the code could be reused for
the more useful programs mentioned above.

-- 
Mikko

Back to sci.logic | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-10 21:36 -0500
  Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-10 23:16 -0400
    Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-10 22:35 -0500
      Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-10 23:49 -0400
        Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-10 23:27 -0500
          Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-11 11:36 -0400
          Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-12 10:42 +0300
            Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 09:22 -0500
              Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-12 18:33 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 12:19 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 13:52 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 13:06 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 14:22 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 13:36 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 16:33 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 16:54 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 18:40 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 17:56 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 19:02 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 18:22 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 18:53 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 20:06 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 19:55 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 19:07 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-12 20:35 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 22:41 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 07:18 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 10:04 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 20:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 19:48 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 21:52 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 21:03 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 22:31 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 21:49 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 23:16 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 22:36 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 07:31 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 08:53 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 22:16 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 21:59 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 23:44 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 23:11 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 07:16 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 08:48 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 20:26 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 19:36 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 20:52 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-16 05:38 +0200
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 22:58 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 20:20 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 21:39 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 20:57 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 22:07 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 21:17 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 22:33 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 21:42 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 23:17 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 22:33 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 07:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 08:37 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 22:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 21:38 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 23:44 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 07:32 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 08:59 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 22:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 21:44 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 22:54 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 22:20 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-16 23:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 22:51 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 07:41 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 09:32 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 21:07 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 20:22 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 21:33 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 21:19 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 22:40 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 22:35 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 08:43 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 09:15 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 10:32 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 11:48 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 12:56 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 12:26 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 13:38 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 14:35 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 15:54 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 14:46 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 15:57 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 15:00 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 18:22 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 17:47 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 19:04 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 22:47 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-19 07:55 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 08:41 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-19 17:03 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 09:15 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-20 10:55 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:48 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-21 11:05 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 09:36 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-22 19:58 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 14:52 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-22 19:01 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 18:55 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-22 21:03 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 20:36 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-22 22:31 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 22:45 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-23 07:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 08:46 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-23 21:44 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 08:32 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-24 11:18 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-24 14:16 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-25 11:01 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-25 13:13 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-26 11:38 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-26 08:52 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-27 11:00 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-27 09:15 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-27 17:19 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-27 09:34 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-28 09:59 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 09:59 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-28 22:04 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 21:39 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-28 23:38 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-28 22:54 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 07:31 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 09:00 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Python <python@invalid.org> - 2024-05-29 09:01 +0200
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 08:11 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-29 19:47 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-29 11:25 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-29 08:31 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-30 09:52 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-30 08:43 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-31 10:17 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-31 10:47 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-01 10:32 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-01 10:41 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-02 10:29 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-02 08:01 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 10:19 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-06-03 07:56 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method MTT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-06-03 17:14 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-23 11:09 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 20:07 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 08:27 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-24 12:15 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-23 11:05 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 08:23 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-24 12:25 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-23 10:54 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-22 10:57 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method (agreement) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 10:55 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-19 13:17 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 15:12 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-19 19:30 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:59 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-20 20:57 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 20:54 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-20 22:24 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 21:56 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-20 23:37 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 00:52 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-21 07:50 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 10:00 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-21 18:08 +0200
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-21 21:46 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method immibis <news@immibis.com> - 2024-05-20 13:29 +0200
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 00:28 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Good job Richard ! ---Socratic method Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 07:41 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-13 12:23 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 09:48 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-13 20:29 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-14 12:08 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 09:42 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 22:16 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-15 11:39 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 09:27 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 20:25 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-16 11:44 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 10:05 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-17 18:49 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 12:23 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 21:07 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-18 12:21 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 22:24 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-13 09:34 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-14 12:16 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 10:18 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-14 22:16 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-15 11:43 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-15 09:31 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-15 20:26 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-16 11:59 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-16 11:00 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-17 18:56 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-17 12:28 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-17 21:07 -0400
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-18 10:46 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 11:59 -0500
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2024-05-14 13:09 +0300
                Re: True on the basis of meaning --- Tarski olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-14 10:26 -0500

csiph-web