Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem

From: Chris Menzel (cmenzel_at_remove-this.tamu.edu)
Date: 10/08/04 

Date: 8 Oct 2004 20:54:27 GMT

On 8 Oct 2004 12:51:33 -0700, Charlie-Boo <chvol@aol.com> said:
> Chris Menzel <cmenzel@remove-this.tamu.edu> wrote
>> On 7 Oct 2004 07:00:26 -0700, Charlie-Boo <chvol@aol.com> said:
>> > Chris Menzel <cmenzel@remove-this.tamu.edu> wrote
>> >> On 6 Oct 2004 16:40:00 -0700, Charlie-Boo <chvol@aol.com> said:
>> >> > Chris Menzel <cmenzel@remove-this.tamu.edu> wrote
>> >> >> If, as it appears, you think provability is a property of sentences, you
>> >> >> obviously don't have any idea what you are talking about.
>> >> >
>> >> > Of course it is. What's the problem?
>> >>
>> >> OK, is "(x)(y)(fx = fy -> x=y)" provable? Yes or no.
>> >
>> > It's a function of your axioms and rules (and definitions.)
>>
>> In other words, provability is not a property of sentences. Congrats.
>
> Typically the axioms and rules are fixed.

Right, fix axioms and rules and you get a notion of provability. In
other words, provability is not a property of sentences. Congrats.

Chris Menzel

Relevant Pages
Quantcast