Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 58,450 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Mikko    |
|    Re: A new foundation for correct reasoni    |
|    27 Nov 25 09:31:53    |
      XPost: sci.logic, comp.theory, sci.math       From: polcott333@gmail.com              On 11/27/2025 1:56 AM, Mikko wrote:       > olcott kirjoitti 26.11.2025 klo 17.39:       >> On 11/26/2025 5:37 AM, Mikko wrote:       >>> olcott kirjoitti 25.11.2025 klo 16.21:       >>>> On 11/25/2025 3:40 AM, Mikko wrote:       >>>>> olcott kirjoitti 25.11.2025 klo 2.53:       >>>>>> Eliminating undecidability and mathematical incompleteness       >>>>>> merely requires discarding model theory and fully integrating       >>>>>> semantics directly into the syntax of the formal language.       >>>>>>       >>>>>> The only inference step allowed is semantic logical       >>>>>> entailment and this is performed syntactically. A formal       >>>>>> language such as Montague Grammar or CycL of the Cyc       >>>>>> project can encode the semantics of anything that can       >>>>>> be expressed in language.       >>>>>       >>>>> The resulting theory is not formal unless both the definition of       >>>>> semantics and the definition of semantic logical entailment are       >>>>> fully formal.       >>>>>       >>>>>       >>>>       >>>> https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/montague-semantics/       >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CycL       >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontology_(information_science)       >>>>       >>>> *This was my original inspiration*       >>>> Kurt Gödel in his 1944 Russell's mathematical logic gave the       >>>> following definition of the "theory of simple types" in a footnote:       >>>>       >>>> By the theory of simple types I mean the doctrine which says that       >>>> the objects of thought (or, in another interpretation, the symbolic       >>>> expressions) are divided into types, namely: individuals, properties       >>>> of individuals, relations between individuals, properties of such       >>>> relations, etc. (with a similar hierarchy for extensions), and that       >>>> sentences of the form: " a has the property φ ", " b bears the       >>>> relation R to c ", etc. are meaningless, if a, b, c, R, φ are not of       >>>> types fitting together.       >>>       >>> That is a constraint on the language. Note that individuals of all sorts       >>> are considered to be of the same type. For properies and relation the       >>> alternative would be that a predicate is false if any of the arguments       >>> are of wrong type. For functions it is harder to find a reasonable value       >>> if an argument is of wrong type.       >>>       >>> This is of course irrelevant to the point that the resulting theory is       >>> not formal unless both the definition of semantics and the definition of       >>> semantic logical entailment are fully formal.       >>       >> The body of knowledge is defined in terms of Rudolf Carnap Meaning       >> Postulates and stored in a knowledge ontology inheritance hierarchy.       >>       >> The predicate Bachelor(x) is stipulated to mean ~Married(x) where the       >> predicate Married(x) is defined in terms of billions of other things       >> such as all of the details of Human(x).       >       > That, too, is irrelevant to the point that the resulting theory is not       > formal unless both the definition of semantics and the definition of       > semantic logical entailment are fully formal.       >              In Olcott's Minimal Type Theory Rudolf Carnap Meaning       Postulates directly encode semantic meaning in the syntax.              The meaningless finite string "Bachelor" is defined as       a semantic predicate through other already defined terms       ∀x (Bachelor(x) := (Male(x) ∧ Human(x) ∧ ~Married(x)))       Adapted by Olcott from Rudolf Carnap Meaning postulates.              And encoded in the syntax of Olcott's Minimal Type Theory       https://philarchive.org/archive/PETMTT-4v2              The predicate Human(x) requires trillions of other       Meaning postulates to provide all of its semantic meaning.              --       Copyright 2025 Olcott              My 28 year goal has been to make       "true on the basis of meaning" computable.              This required establishing a new foundation       for correct reasoning.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca