Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots
From: Peter Olcott (olcott_at_worldnet.att.net)
Date: 07/08/04
- Next message: Peter Olcott: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Previous message: Kenneth Doyle: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Maybe in reply to: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Next in thread: Peter Olcott: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 03:21:32 GMT
> This is precisely the point. The halting problem and its unsolvability
> have nothing to do with language philosophy, at least directly. Thinking
> that musings about "ill-formed" propositions and what not are relevant
> to the validity of the proof of the unsolvability of the halting problem
> is confusing mathematics with figments of imagination.
Ultimately the entire set of conceptual truth is only represented
in what would most aptly be described as language.
A mathematical mapping between Symbolic and or phonetic
representations and the concepts themselves.
- Next message: Peter Olcott: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Previous message: Kenneth Doyle: "Re: Alan Turing's Halting Problem is Incorrect (FINAL PART)"
- Maybe in reply to: Acme Diagnostics: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Next in thread: Peter Olcott: "Re: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|