On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the
substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and G.
He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same. (That one
can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close relationship
to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is The Liar which is
under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar *does*
assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not.
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is predicated on
the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not going to retype my
explanation for this as I have already given it in a previous post.
You're more than welcome to go back and read that post. Unless you
actually have some comment on that explanation, there's no point
repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you lying
bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
On 5/1/2022 5:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the
substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and G.
He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same. (That one
can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close relationship
to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is The Liar which is
under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar
*does* assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not.
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is predicated
on the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not going to retype
my explanation for this as I have already given it in a previous
post. You're more than welcome to go back and read that post. Unless
you actually have some comment on that explanation, there's no point
repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you lying
bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
I just proved that you are a lying bastard. I can very easily forgive
and forget, what I will not do is tolerate mistreatment
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar undecidability proof
The Liar Paradox is an epistemological antinomy
Translating this to a syllogism
All X are a Y
The LP is and X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
That you disagree with this makes you a lying bastard.
On 2022-05-01 16:44, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 5:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the
substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and
G. He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same. (That
one can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close
relationship to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is The
Liar which is under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar
*does* assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not.
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is predicated
on the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not going to retype
my explanation for this as I have already given it in a previous
post. You're more than welcome to go back and read that post.
Unless you actually have some comment on that explanation, there's
no point repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you lying
bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
I just proved that you are a lying bastard. I can very easily forgive
and forget, what I will not do is tolerate mistreatment
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
The Liar Paradox is an epistemological antinomy
Translating this to a syllogism
All X are a Y
The LP is and X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
That you disagree with this makes you a lying bastard.
For christ's sake. You can't even see the irrelevance of the above.
Let's consider what the X and Y are in the above:
X would be 'Is an Antinomy'
Since Gödel was *already* talking about The Liar, Y is "Can be used to
form an undecidability proof in a similar manner as Gödel has done with
The Liar"
So you've just proved that The Liar can be used to form a similar proof
as the one Gödel forms using The Liar.
Do you feel proud of yourself?
What you keep ignoring, which were the points my posts were actually
about was exactly *what* sort of relationship holds between The Liar and Gödel's G. It is *not* one of identity.
There is a close relationship between the Book of Genesis and the Epic
of Gilgamesh.
Gilgamesh figures prominently in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
Therefore Gilgamesh figures prominently in the Book of Genesis.
According to the Epic of Gilgamesh, a savage can become civilized by
having sex with a prostitute.
Therefore the Book of Genesis advocates forcing the uncivilized to have
sex with prostitutes.
Do you see a problem with the above arguments? Saying there is a 'close relationship' between two things doesn't mean you can conclude
*anything* about one based on the other. You need to consider exactly
*what* the relationship actually is. What are the similarities and what
are the differences? You insist on treating the two as if they were the
same thing. They aren't, anymore than the Book of Genesis and the Epic
of Gilgamesh are the same thing.
André
On 5/1/2022 6:15 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:44, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 5:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the
substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and >>>>>> G. He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same.
(That one can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close
relationship to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is
The Liar which is under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar
*does* assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not.
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is predicated >>>>>> on the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not going to
retype my explanation for this as I have already given it in a
previous post. You're more than welcome to go back and read that
post. Unless you actually have some comment on that explanation,
there's no point repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
similar undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you
lying bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
I just proved that you are a lying bastard. I can very easily forgive
and forget, what I will not do is tolerate mistreatment
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
The Liar Paradox is an epistemological antinomy
Translating this to a syllogism
All X are a Y
The LP is and X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
That you disagree with this makes you a lying bastard.
For christ's sake. You can't even see the irrelevance of the above.
Let's consider what the X and Y are in the above:
X would be 'Is an Antinomy'
Not quite.
X = is an epistemological antinomy
Since Gödel was *already* talking about The Liar, Y is "Can be used to
form an undecidability proof in a similar manner as Gödel has done
with The Liar"
So you've just proved that The Liar can be used to form a similar
proof as the one Gödel forms using The Liar.
Do you feel proud of yourself?
What you keep ignoring, which were the points my posts were actually
about was exactly *what* sort of relationship holds between The Liar
and Gödel's G. It is *not* one of identity.
Of course not nitwit, you know that I mean equivalence.
What kind of stupid fool would believe that I mean that G and LP are one
and the same thing? I know, I know, a jackass that wants to play head
games.
There is a close relationship between the Book of Genesis and the Epic
of Gilgamesh.
He says two different things about the Liar Paradox Jackass.
(1) About the Liar Paradox in particular.
(2) About the entire category that the Liar Paradox belongs:
epistemological antinomies.
If every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar undecidability proof then the liar paradox can be used for a similar undecidability proof.
X = set of epistemological antinomies.
Y = can be used for a similar undecidability proof.
All X are Y
The LP is an X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
On 2022-05-01 17:33, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 6:15 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:44, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 5:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the >>>>>>> substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and >>>>>>> G. He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same.
(That one can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close >>>>>>> relationship to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is
The Liar which is under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar
*does* assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not. >>>>>>>
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is
predicated on the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not
going to retype my explanation for this as I have already given
it in a previous post. You're more than welcome to go back and
read that post. Unless you actually have some comment on that
explanation, there's no point repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a
similar undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you
lying bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
I just proved that you are a lying bastard. I can very easily
forgive and forget, what I will not do is tolerate mistreatment
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
The Liar Paradox is an epistemological antinomy
Translating this to a syllogism
All X are a Y
The LP is and X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
That you disagree with this makes you a lying bastard.
For christ's sake. You can't even see the irrelevance of the above.
Let's consider what the X and Y are in the above:
X would be 'Is an Antinomy'
Not quite.
X = is an epistemological antinomy
Since Gödel was *already* talking about The Liar, Y is "Can be used
to form an undecidability proof in a similar manner as Gödel has done
with The Liar"
So you've just proved that The Liar can be used to form a similar
proof as the one Gödel forms using The Liar.
Do you feel proud of yourself?
What you keep ignoring, which were the points my posts were actually
about was exactly *what* sort of relationship holds between The Liar
and Gödel's G. It is *not* one of identity.
Of course not nitwit, you know that I mean equivalence.
Equivalence with respect to *what*?
If two things are equivalent but not identical, it means they are
equivalent with respect to some things but not equivalent with respect
to others.
The entire point of my posts has been to clarify some senses in which
the two are *not* equivalent. But instead of addressing that you keep
trying to prove that The Liar is in the same class as The Liar.
What kind of stupid fool would believe that I mean that G and LP are
one and the same thing? I know, I know, a jackass that wants to play
head games.
There is a close relationship between the Book of Genesis and the
Epic of Gilgamesh.
He says two different things about the Liar Paradox Jackass.
(1) About the Liar Paradox in particular.
(2) About the entire category that the Liar Paradox belongs:
epistemological antinomies.
Yes, and if the LP is *not* equivalent to G with respect to X, then none
of the analogous sentences based on other antinomies would be equivalent
with respect to X either.
If every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof then the liar paradox can be used for a similar
undecidability proof.
X = set of epistemological antinomies.
Y = can be used for a similar undecidability proof.
All X are Y
The LP is an X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
Yes. The Liar and the Liar can be used for similar undecidability
proofs. I have no idea what it is you hope to achieve by arguing for a truism.
André
On 5/1/22 7:15 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 5:37 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:As Andre pointed out, when you look at the statement to see what the
On 2022-05-01 16:04, olcott wrote:
On 5/1/2022 3:51 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
The only one being dishonest here is you as you keep snipping the
substance of my post.
Gödel claims there is a *close relationship* between The Liar and
G. He most certainly does *not* claim that they are the same. (That
one can construct similar proofs which bear a similar close
relationship to other antinomies is hardly relevant since it is The
Liar which is under discussion).
There are two crucial differences between G and The Liar:
(a) G does *not* assert its own unprovability whereas The Liar
*does* assert its own falsity.
(b) G is most definitely a truth-bearer even if The Liar is not.
Your claim the Gödel's theorem is a 'category error' is predicated
on the fact that you don't grasp (b) above. I'm not going to retype
my explanation for this as I have already given it in a previous
post. You're more than welcome to go back and read that post.
Unless you actually have some comment on that explanation, there's
no point repeating yourself.
André
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
and the Liar Paradox is and is an epistemological antinomy you lying
bastard.
Since you're clearly not planning on addressing any of my points, I
think we're done.
I'll leave you with a small multiple choice quiz: Are you
(a) someone who was dropped on their head as a child.
(b) suffering from foetal alcohol syndrome.
(c) thick as a brick.
(d) all of the above.
André
I just proved that you are a lying bastard. I can very easily forgive
and forget, what I will not do is tolerate mistreatment
14 Every epistemological antinomy can likewise be used for a similar
undecidability proof
The Liar Paradox is an epistemological antinomy
Translating this to a syllogism
All X are a Y
The LP is and X
Therefore the LP is a Y.
That you disagree with this makes you a lying bastard.
terms are, you just agreed with him and proved that YOU are the Liar.
Yes. The Liar and the Liar can be used for similar undecidability
proofs. I have no idea what it is you hope to achieve by arguing for a truism.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 126:45:56 |
| Calls: | 6,663 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,335,073 |