• Re: Undecidability based on epistemological antinomies V2 --correct reasoning--

    From polcott@polcott333@gmail.com to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang on Sat May 23 18:34:46 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    "cats" <are> "animals" is one Rudolf Carnap Meaning Postulate.

    If we don't have some stipulated basis then anything
    that can be said in any human or formal language remains
    utterly meaningless. Expressions of language ONLY acquire
    meaning on the basis of relations to other expressions
    of language.

    This is something like:
    Truth-conditional semantics is an approach to
    semantics of natural language that sees meaning
    (or at least the meaning of assertions) as being
    the same as, or reducible to, their truth conditions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-conditional_semantics

    Semantic entailment specified syntactically is merely
    special relations between finite strings.

    "cats" have the <is a type of> relation to "animals"
    This is essentially a Rudolf Carnap Meaning Postulate.
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.
    The complete structure of this system is now defined.

    The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
    comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
    (a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

    My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
    expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
    language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

    (b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
    entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mikko@mikko.levanto@iki.fi to comp.theory,sci.logic,sci.lang on Sun May 24 11:08:51 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be
    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.
    --
    Mikko
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to sci.logic,comp.theory,sci.lang,comp.ai.philosophy on Sun May 24 17:31:20 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.


    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.
    The complete structure of this system is now defined.

    The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
    comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
    (a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

    My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
    expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
    language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

    (b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
    entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mikko@mikko.levanto@iki.fi to sci.logic,comp.theory,sci.lang,comp.ai.philosophy on Mon May 25 11:03:13 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.
    --
    Mikko
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to sci.logic,sci.math,sci.lang,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy on Mon May 25 09:12:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 5/25/2026 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.


    If it is not what somebody know then it is not knowledge.
    The key purpose of the system is to disseminate correct
    knowledge dividing well crafted lies from truth.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.


    That is flatly incorrect to the degree of calling a
    cat some kind of breed of dog. Self-evidence is the
    primary core of epistemology. It is the glue that
    holds semantics together.
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.
    The complete structure of this system is now defined.

    The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
    comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
    (a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

    My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
    expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
    language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

    (b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
    entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Ross Finlayson@ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com to sci.logic,sci.math,sci.lang,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy on Mon May 25 09:48:46 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 05/25/2026 07:12 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2026 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.


    If it is not what somebody know then it is not knowledge.
    The key purpose of the system is to disseminate correct
    knowledge dividing well crafted lies from truth.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.


    That is flatly incorrect to the degree of calling a
    cat some kind of breed of dog. Self-evidence is the
    primary core of epistemology. It is the glue that
    holds semantics together.




    "Isn't it ironic?"


    The idea of "complementary duals" has for example that
    x = x and x = V \ x, where 'V' is the universe,
    and V \ x is an elementary embedding of the universe
    into itself making the most obvious sort of example
    of a resolution of the "Kunen inconsistency", has
    that in a true world of fact an object is defined
    by everything that it is not.

    Most people's account of meaning, or, the epistemological,
    is due associations in relations.

    Then, both accounts of birth and death often recount
    the "into the light", one into the world of sense
    the inchoate, the other out, also inchoate.

    So, something like "In The Light" from Led Zeppelin
    or Alanis Morrisette's "Isn't It Ironic?" makes for
    that when one has a theory of everything that's true
    then good music lyrically is generally profound,
    and otherwise it's personal accounts of often enough
    the perspectival, generously, or the fragmented (or insane).

    I'm Like a Bird / Seeds of Love


    Music's a good medium, for meaning.


    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to sci.logic,sci.math,sci.lang,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy on Mon May 25 12:57:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 5/25/2026 11:48 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 05/25/2026 07:12 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2026 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe. >>>>>>>

    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.


    If it is not what somebody know then it is not knowledge.
    The key purpose of the system is to disseminate correct
    knowledge dividing well crafted lies from truth.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.


    That is flatly incorrect to the degree of calling a
    cat some kind of breed of dog. Self-evidence is the
    primary core of epistemology. It is the glue that
    holds semantics together.




    "Isn't it ironic?"


    The idea of "complementary duals" has for example that
    x = x and x = V \ x, where 'V' is the universe,
    and V \ x is an elementary embedding of the universe
    into itself making the most obvious sort of example
    of a resolution of the "Kunen inconsistency", has
    that in a true world of fact an object is defined
    by everything that it is not.

    Most people's account of meaning, or, the epistemological,
    is due associations in relations.


    I am trying to prevent the end of life on Earth through
    climate change hired liars. Can you stick to the point?
    Are you not intelligent enough to understand the dire
    threat of climate change?

    Then, both accounts of birth and death often recount
    the "into the light", one into the world of sense
    the inchoate, the other out, also inchoate.

    So, something like "In The Light" from Led Zeppelin
    or Alanis Morrisette's "Isn't It Ironic?" makes for
    that when one has a theory of everything that's true
    then good music lyrically is generally profound,
    and otherwise it's personal accounts of often enough
    the perspectival, generously, or the fragmented (or insane).

    I'm Like a Bird / Seeds of Love


    Music's a good medium, for meaning.


    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott

    My 28 year goal has been to make
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
    reliably computable for the entire body of knowledge.
    The complete structure of this system is now defined.

    The entire body of knowledge expressed in language is
    comprised of two types of relations between finite strings:
    (a) *Axioms* Expressions of language that are stipulated to be true.

    My system bridges the analytic/synthetic distinction by
    expressly encoding all empirical "atomic facts" in a formal
    language such as CycL of the Cyc project.

    (b) *Inference Rules* Expressions of language that are semantically
    entailed syntactically from (a) and/or (b).
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Ross Finlayson@ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com to sci.logic,sci.math,sci.lang,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy on Mon May 25 20:54:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 05/25/2026 10:57 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2026 11:48 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    On 05/25/2026 07:12 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2026 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe. >>>>>>>>

    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.


    If it is not what somebody know then it is not knowledge.
    The key purpose of the system is to disseminate correct
    knowledge dividing well crafted lies from truth.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.


    That is flatly incorrect to the degree of calling a
    cat some kind of breed of dog. Self-evidence is the
    primary core of epistemology. It is the glue that
    holds semantics together.




    "Isn't it ironic?"


    The idea of "complementary duals" has for example that
    x = x and x = V \ x, where 'V' is the universe,
    and V \ x is an elementary embedding of the universe
    into itself making the most obvious sort of example
    of a resolution of the "Kunen inconsistency", has
    that in a true world of fact an object is defined
    by everything that it is not.

    Most people's account of meaning, or, the epistemological,
    is due associations in relations.


    I am trying to prevent the end of life on Earth through
    climate change hired liars. Can you stick to the point?
    Are you not intelligent enough to understand the dire
    threat of climate change?

    Then, both accounts of birth and death often recount
    the "into the light", one into the world of sense
    the inchoate, the other out, also inchoate.

    So, something like "In The Light" from Led Zeppelin
    or Alanis Morrisette's "Isn't It Ironic?" makes for
    that when one has a theory of everything that's true
    then good music lyrically is generally profound,
    and otherwise it's personal accounts of often enough
    the perspectival, generously, or the fragmented (or insane).

    I'm Like a Bird / Seeds of Love


    Music's a good medium, for meaning.





    Why, you haven't solved a single paradox.

    The "ignore them away" won't work on usual problems
    also, yet there is that "ignore them away" works
    on sock-puppets, propagandists, worm-tongues, and so on.


    De Morgan doesn't need material implication to do logic
    and be logical, and scientific, neither does anyone else.


    Plainly, I don't see deliverance coming. Yet, I try
    not to overthink geo-engineering. About global warming,
    it's a usual idea to seed the upper atmosphere with dust,
    yet, really there's space colonization to get figured out,
    and to avoid the mistakes of the past with regards to
    the in-humanity.


    About actually making a theory so that humanity already
    has a theory that's constant, consistent, complete,
    and concrete, beyond usual accounts of logical paradox,
    so that we don't seem stupid or incapable to large,
    competent, conscientious, co-operative reasoners,
    there's "theatheory".



    Anyways, infinity is _in_ the theory, always _in_
    the theory, and always will be _in_ the theory,
    continously.



    Music is a sort of continuous-tone imagery.
    Some people just hear notes, yet, tone is distinct,
    much like the account of quantum mechanics, that
    it's a causal and continuous quantum mechanics.

    The potential fields are the real fields.




    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Mikko@mikko.levanto@iki.fi to sci.logic,sci.math,sci.lang,comp.theory,comp.ai.philosophy on Tue May 26 10:50:25 2026
    From Newsgroup: sci.lang

    On 25/05/2026 17:12, olcott wrote:
    On 5/25/2026 3:03 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 25/05/2026 01:31, olcott wrote:
    On 5/24/2026 3:08 AM, Mikko wrote:
    On 24/05/2026 02:34, polcott wrote:
    On 5/23/2026 5:41 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
    Ah. What you have there is "Believes(you, L, x)", I believe.


    No! It is all computed objective truth on the basis
    of stipulated objectively true atomic facts.

    What you call "stipulated objectively true atomic facts" may be

    Are things such as "cats" <are> "animals" where
    disagreement is error.

    The proposed service is not very useful if its scope is testricted
    to what everbody already knows.

    If it is not what somebody know then it is not knowledge.
    The key purpose of the system is to disseminate correct
    knowledge dividing well crafted lies from truth.

    Your example is so far from any well crefted lies that it rather
    suggests that the scope will be what everybody knows.

    objectively false and so can be whatever is computed from them
    even when the computation itelf is objetively valid.

    SEMANTIC TAUTOLOGIES are expressions of language that
    are proved necessarily true entirely on the basis of
    other expressions of language.

    In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident
    proposition is a proposition that is known to be true
    by understanding its meaning without proof.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

    A self-evident proposition is outside of the main scope of
    epistemology though it may have some marginal significance.

    That is flatly incorrect to the degree of calling a
    cat some kind of breed of dog. Self-evidence is the
    primary core of epistemology. It is the glue that
    holds semantics together.

    Can you support your claim with a reference to a textbook or some
    other respectable source or is the above just un example of a well
    crafted lie?
    --
    Mikko
    --- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2