XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory   
   From: rjh@cpax.org.uk   
      
   On 02/10/2025 20:15, olcott wrote:   
   > On 10/2/2025 1:29 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:   
      
      
      
   >>   
   >> WHAT new idea?   
   > *My whole grand opus is proven right here by is coherence*   
   > https://claude.ai/share/45d3ca9c-fa9a-4a02-9e22-c6acd0057275   
      
   An LLM replies:   
   --------------------------------------------------------   
   The first logic error is the sentence:   
   "So the simple prolog finally resolved the liar paradox as not a   
   bearer of truth."   
      
   Why it's an error: the claim contradicts the author’s earlier   
   correct concession that the Prolog example does not prove the   
   philosophical point. Rejecting a syntactic construction via an   
   occurs-check is a computational diagnostics move, not a   
   philosophical proof that the natural-language Liar lacks   
   truth-value. The sentence conflates a model-level implementation   
   decision with a settled metaphysical conclusion.   
   --------------------------------------------------------   
      
   Don't bother replying here if you don't want to. You can take it   
   up directly with an LLM.   
      
   --   
   Richard Heathfield   
   Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk   
   "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999   
   Sig line 4 vacant - apply within   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)