Marchal wrote:
>
> This is one of my motivation for thinking that consciousness
> and consistency share the formula:
>
> -[]c
>
> Saying just that c (consistency, consciousness) is not provable,
> not finitely communicable, ... ineffable?
>
> Goedel's second theorem: c -> -[]c (c = <>TRUE, or -[]FALSE).
>
Would Descartes' statement be written as :
( c -> -[]c) -> c
How would you prove it? As it stands it appears to be a third person
statement. How would you make it a first person statement with Kripke's
logic?
George
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Scott D. Yelich
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge rwas rwas
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge rwas rwas
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge jamikes
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Brent Meeker
- Re: Belief & Knowledge George Levy
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal
- Re: Belief & Knowledge George Levy
- Re: Belief & Knowledge Marchal

