Tom Caylor wrote:
> 1Z wrote:
> > Bruno Marchal wrote:
> > > Le 26-oct.-06, à 21:11, 1Z a écrit :
> > >
> > > >> If your definition of truth is limited to logical inference given a
> > > >> certain set of axioms and inference rules, then what are we trying to
> > > >> do on the Everything List?
> > > >
> > > > That's *mathematical* truth.
> > >
> > > It is not. This is just provability. Since Godel we know that they are
> > > not the same.
> > We are not *forced* to the conclusion that
> > there *is* a kind of truth which is completely
> > separate from provability. Platonism is
> > *possible* in the face of Godel, but so is intuitionism.
> True. But there always is a truth that is not provable (given the
You can't be sure that it is a truth unless you can prove it.
Albeit in another system.
> And you can find out more about it by changing the system and comparing
> By the way, you never answered my question, what are we trying to do on
> the Everything List besides logical inference given a system?
One thing is to compare the reasonableness of
> My take
> is that at least part of what we are doing is banging systems against
> each other via discussion. If this is not productive, then we should
> abandon the Everything List and buy telescopes.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at