Hi Bruno Marchal Semantic truth I think is 1p (personal, private) truth, which mnakes it contingent, while logical truth is necessary as well as public or 3p truth. I think comnputers have problems with 1p truth because for one thing the coding is done by someone outside.
[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/2/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen ----- Receiving the following content ----- From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-02, 04:07:39 Subject: Re: Numbers in the Platonic Realm On 30 Nov 2012, at 21:28, meekerdb wrote: On 11/30/2012 10:02 AM, Roger Clough wrote: And a transcendent truth could be arithmetic truth or the truth of necessary logic. True in logic and formal mathematics is just marker "T" that is preserved by the rules of inference. This makes no sense. You confuse the propositional constant T, with the semantical notion of truth. The first is expressible/definable formally (indeed by T, or by "0 = 0" in arithmetic), the second is not (Tarski theorem). When we say that truth is preserved by the rules of inference, we are concerned with the second notion. In applications it is interpreted as if it were the correspondence meaning of 'true'. Like in arithmetic. Truth of "ExP(x)" means that it exists a n such that P(n), at the "metalevel", which is the bare level in logic (that explains many confusion). But like all applications of mathematics, it may be only approximate. Yes, but for arithmetic it is pretty clear, as we share our intuition on the so-called standard finite numbers. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
