• Re: Olcott doesn't understand meta-systems

    From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Wed Jul 10 07:24:08 2024
    XPost: sci.logic

    On 7/9/24 11:24 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 7/8/2024 7:37 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

    Tarski's x like Godel's G are know to be true by an infinite sequence
    of truth preserving operations.


    "are *know to be true* by an infinite sequence"
    "are *know to be true* by an infinite sequence"
    "are *know to be true* by an infinite sequence"
    "are *know to be true* by an infinite sequence"
    "are *know to be true* by an infinite sequence"

    Right, because the existance of such a sequence was shown by a proof in
    the mete.


    On 7/8/2024 9:59 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    No, infinite "proofs" determine TRUTH, not knowledge.

    *I am going to keep hammering you on this over-and-over*
    *I am going to keep hammering you on this over-and-over*
    *I am going to keep hammering you on this over-and-over*


    And just prove you are an idiot because you don't understand the concept
    of a meta-system based on extending a system, which might be able to
    prove things about the original system that the original system couldn't
    prove itself.

    Which might be because you just don't understand how Formal Logic works,
    and doesn't need to be tied to our "real world".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)