On 6 Aug, 03:37, Colin Hales <c.ha...@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:

> (b) is not a claim of truth or falsehood. It is a claim that the very
> idea of <Sa> ever proposing COMP (= doubting that COMP is true) is
> impossible. This is because it is a formal system trying, with a fixed,
> formal set of rules (even self modifying according to yet more rules) to
> construct statements that are the product of an informal system (a human
> scientist). The very idea of this is a contradiction in terms. The
> formal system is 100% deterministic, unable to violate rules. When it
> encounters a liar it will be unable to resolve what falsehood is being
> presented. It requires all falsehoods to be a-priori known. Impossible.
> How can a formal system encounter a world in which COMP is actually
> false? If it could, COMP would be FALSE! If COMP is true then it can't.
> Humans are informal....ergo we have some part of the natural world
> capable of behaving informally....=> GOTCHA!

Nope. Fuzziness (fuzzy logic) and inconsistently (paraconsistent
can be modeled formally.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to