Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem
From: Charlie-Boo (chvol_at_aol.com)
Date: 12/18/04
- Next message: namducnguyen: "Re: On the [Possible] Undecidability of Goldbach's Conjecture [in PA]."
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: The definition of consciousness"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Reply: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 18 Dec 2004 09:08:45 -0800
Daryl McCullough wrote:
> Charlie-Boo says...
>
> >I quoted a reputable source that what you said was wrong. Now show
a
> >quote that proves me wrong.
>
> That quote did not contradict what David Ullrich was saying.
> David is not disagreeing with Smullyan, he's disagreeing with
> *you*. You are misinterpreting what Smullyan said.
>
> Once again, truth and provability are different things *unless*
> you are dealing with a complete theory (which is the case for
> the theory of true arithmetic that Smullyan was talking about).
In that theory, is Smullyan defining provability to be truth?
C-B
> --
> Daryl McCullough
> Ithaca, NY
- Next message: namducnguyen: "Re: On the [Possible] Undecidability of Goldbach's Conjecture [in PA]."
- Previous message: Albert: "Re: The definition of consciousness"
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Reply: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Deep Thoughts # 17: Liar Paradox is a Formal Metamathematical Theorem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
