Re: SV: SV: Only logic is necessary?

2006-07-10 Thread 1Z
Lennart Nilsson wrote: Cooper says that a formalist, with only formal constraints on his logic (such as consistensy) is at the mercy of the formalism itself. Meaning what ? That the formalism might not be giving answers that are really right ? How would we tell ? using some other logic ? Or

RE: SV: SV: Only logic is necessary?

2006-07-09 Thread Jesse Mazer
Lennart Nilsson wrote: We use mathematics as a meta-language, just like you kan describe what is said in latin by using italian. That does not make italian logically/evolutionary prior to latin of course. But in this case we are using mathematics to describe actual events in the real world,

Re: SV: SV: Only logic is necessary?

2006-07-09 Thread Brent Meeker
Jesse Mazer wrote: Lennart Nilsson wrote: We use mathematics as a meta-language, just like you kan describe what is said in latin by using italian. That does not make italian logically/evolutionary prior to latin of course. But in this case we are using mathematics to describe actual events

Re: SV: SV: Only logic is necessary?

2006-07-09 Thread Jesse Mazer
Brent Meeker wrote: Jesse Mazer wrote: Lennart Nilsson wrote: We use mathematics as a meta-language, just like you kan describe what is said in latin by using italian. That does not make italian logically/evolutionary prior to latin of course. But in this case we are using

Re: SV: SV: Only logic is necessary?

2006-07-09 Thread Brent Meeker
Jesse Mazer wrote: Brent Meeker wrote: Jesse Mazer wrote: Lennart Nilsson wrote: We use mathematics as a meta-language, just like you kan describe what is said in latin by using italian. That does not make italian logically/evolutionary prior to latin of course. But in this case we