On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:02 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 9:36:39 AM UTC-6, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 2:53 AM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, December 8, 2018 at 2:27:45 PM UTC-6, Jason wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I think truth is primitive. >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>> >>> >>> As a matter of linguistics (and philosophy), *truth* and *matter* are >>> linked: >>> >>> "As a matter of fact, ..." >>> "The truth of the matter is ..." >>> "It matters that ..." >>> ... >>> [ https://www.etymonline.com/word/matter ] >>> >> >> I agree they are linked. Though matter may be a few steps removed from >> truth. Perhaps one way to interpret the link more directly is thusly: >> >> There is an equation whose every solution (where the equation happens to >> be *true*, e.g. is satisfied when it has certain values assigned to its >> variables) maps its variables to states of the time evolution of the wave >> function of our universe. You might say that we (literally not >> figuratively) live within such an equation. That its truth reifies what we >> call matter. >> >> But I think truth plays an even more fundamental roll than this. e.g. >> because the following statement is *true* "two has a successor" then >> there exists a successor to 2 distinct from any previous number. >> Similarly, the *truth* of "9 is not prime" implies the existence of a >> factor of 9 besides 1 and 9. >> >> Jason >> >> >> >> >>> >>> Schopenhauer 's view: "A judgment has *material truth* if its concepts >>> are based on intuitive perceptions that are generated from sensations. If a >>> judgment has its reason (ground) in another judgment, its truth is called >>> logical or formal. If a judgment, of, for example, pure mathematics or pure >>> science, is based on the forms (space, time, causality) of intuitive, >>> empirical knowledge, then the judgment has transcendental truth." >>> [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth ] >>> >>> >> I guess I am referring to transcend truth here. Truth concerning the >> integers is sufficient to yield the universe, matter, and all that we see >> around us. >> >> Jason >> > > > > In my view there is basically just *material* (from matter) truth and > *linguistic* (from language) truth. > > [ https://codicalist.wordpress.com/2018/06/18/to-tell-the-truth/ ] > > Relations and functions are linguistic: relational type theory (RTT) , > functional type theory (FTT) languages. > > Numbers are also linguistic beings, the (fictional) semantic objects of > Peano arithmetic (PA). > > Numbers can be "materialized" via *nominalization *(cf. Hartry Field, > refs. in [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartry_Field ]). > > Assuming the primacy of matter assumes more and explains less, than assuming the primacy of arithmetical truth. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
