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 > system).
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 > results. > > 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 various axioms. > 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. > > Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---