XPost: sci.logic
On 1/24/24 12:46 PM, olcott wrote:
*Tarski anchors his whole proof in the Liar Paradox* https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_247_248.pdf
"x asserts that x is not a true sentence." page 248
https://liarparadox.org/Tarski_275_276.pdf
"x asserts that x is not a true sentence." page 248
is encoded as: x ∉ True if and only if p
"where the symbol 'p' represents the whole sentence x"
before it has been transformed page 275
we replace 'Tr' in this convention by 'Pr'
thus becomes // on page 275
"(1) x ∉ Provable if and only if p"
"where the symbol 'p' represents the whole sentence x"
*Proving that the Tarski Undefinability has an adapted*
*form of the Liar Paradox as the first line of his proof*
And you clearly don't see that he shows that this is a result of there
being a definition of Truth.
You just don't understand how logic works and are picking pieces out of context, proving you just don't understand what you are talking about.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)