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]
"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 

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 

  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.



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