On Sunday, December 24, 2023 at 7:11:45 PM UTC, Nicki makethings wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 19, 2023 at 3:22:47 PM UTC, olcott wrote:
> > On 12/19/2023 7:34 AM, immibis wrote:
> > > On 12/19/23 04:02, olcott wrote:
> > >> On 12/18/2023 11:37 AM, immibis wrote:
> > >>> On 12/17/23 18:11, olcott wrote:
> > >>>> On 12/17/2023 2:17 AM, immibis wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> "The moon is made from green cheese" is a necessary consequence of
> > >>>>> "all cats are dogs" and "some cats are not dogs". Or can you
> > >>>>> imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not dogs,
> > >>>>> but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> It is not true that anything is semantically entailed by any
> > >>>> contradiction. When the Principle of explosion says that everything is
> > >>>> syntactically entailed by a contradiction the POE is a liar that denies
> > >>>> the law of non-contradiction. For analytical truth coherence is the
> > >>>> measure.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Can you imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not
> > >>> dogs, but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
> > >>
> > >> That would be incoherent: The coherence theory of truth applies to the
> > >> analytical body of knowledge.
> > >>
> > > I've never heard of these two, and they seem to be fully immersed in
> > > philosophy, not computer science or mathematical logic.
> > Without Philosophy logic has no basis. The basis that logic does have is
> > incoherent because they got the philosophy wrong.
> >
> > A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
> > that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
> > nevertheless to be false. https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
> >
> > On that basis we can conclude that this sentence is valid:
> > "Kittens are 15 story office buildings therefore water is H2O."
> >
> > When we redefine value to be a conclusion must be a necessary
> > consequence of all of its premises then the above nonsense
> > sentence is not valid.
> > --
> > Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
> > hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
> Without facts there is no proof, but, everything in philosophy is down to semantics.

Think of there can not be fire without water, you should require a verb (an operator) in there to say what they're doing. Semantics will separate the operator verb from the noun. We might have eaten green cheese or seen the moon but not until we have actual proof by one of our senses. Think of dogs & cats, they can seem very similar, but we should aught to have at least gotten close & observed their behaviour as a kind of 'proof' so nouns are not the very same as nouns, parse language or while you could, go to Google Groups Sci Lang & ask about operators in philosophy logic, its an idea.

Have A Very Merry Christmas XX Nic.

On 12/24/2023 1:11 PM, Nicki makethings wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 19, 2023 at 3:22:47 PM UTC, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/19/2023 7:34 AM, immibis wrote:
>>> On 12/19/23 04:02, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/18/2023 11:37 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>> On 12/17/23 18:11, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/17/2023 2:17 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The moon is made from green cheese" is a necessary consequence of
>>>>>>> "all cats are dogs" and "some cats are not dogs". Or can you
>>>>>>> imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not dogs,
>>>>>>> but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is not true that anything is semantically entailed by any
>>>>>> contradiction. When the Principle of explosion says that everything is
>>>>>> syntactically entailed by a contradiction the POE is a liar that denies
>>>>>> the law of non-contradiction. For analytical truth coherence is the
>>>>>> measure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not
>>>>> dogs, but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
>>>>
>>>> That would be incoherent: The coherence theory of truth applies to the
>>>> analytical body of knowledge.
>>>>
>>> I've never heard of these two, and they seem to be fully immersed in
>>> philosophy, not computer science or mathematical logic.
>> Without Philosophy logic has no basis. The basis that logic does have is
>> incoherent because they got the philosophy wrong.
>>
>> A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
>> that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
>> nevertheless to be false. https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
>>
>> On that basis we can conclude that this sentence is valid:
>> "Kittens are 15 story office buildings therefore water is H2O."
>>
>> When we redefine value to be a conclusion must be a necessary
>> consequence of all of its premises then the above nonsense
>> sentence is not valid.
>> --
>> Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
>
> Without facts there is no proof, but, everything in philosophy is down to semantics.

Good job, I think that you got it!

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

On 12/24/2023 1:11 PM, Nicki makethings wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 19, 2023 at 3:22:47 PM UTC, olcott wrote:
>> On 12/19/2023 7:34 AM, immibis wrote:
>>> On 12/19/23 04:02, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 12/18/2023 11:37 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>> On 12/17/23 18:11, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/17/2023 2:17 AM, immibis wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The moon is made from green cheese" is a necessary consequence of
>>>>>>> "all cats are dogs" and "some cats are not dogs". Or can you
>>>>>>> imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not dogs,
>>>>>>> but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is not true that anything is semantically entailed by any
>>>>>> contradiction. When the Principle of explosion says that everything is
>>>>>> syntactically entailed by a contradiction the POE is a liar that denies
>>>>>> the law of non-contradiction. For analytical truth coherence is the
>>>>>> measure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you imagine a world where all cats are dogs and some cats are not
>>>>> dogs, but the moon isn't made from green cheese?
>>>>
>>>> That would be incoherent: The coherence theory of truth applies to the
>>>> analytical body of knowledge.
>>>>
>>> I've never heard of these two, and they seem to be fully immersed in
>>> philosophy, not computer science or mathematical logic.
>> Without Philosophy logic has no basis. The basis that logic does have is
>> incoherent because they got the philosophy wrong.
>>
>> A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form
>> that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion
>> nevertheless to be false. https://iep.utm.edu/val-snd/
>>
>> On that basis we can conclude that this sentence is valid:
>> "Kittens are 15 story office buildings therefore water is H2O."
>>
>> When we redefine value to be a conclusion must be a necessary
>> consequence of all of its premises then the above nonsense
>> sentence is not valid.
>> --
>> Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
>> hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
>
> Without facts there is no proof, but, everything in philosophy is down to semantics.

All of analytic truth has two forms
(1) Expressions stipulated to be true (AKA Facts)
(2) Expressions derived from (1)

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer