XPost: sci.logic, sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/11/2026 3:28 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:   
   > On 11/01/2026 18:12, olcott wrote:   
   >> On 1/11/2026 8:39 AM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:   
   >   
   >>> What does "officially accepted" mean?   
   >>   
   >> Basically a broad consensus of conventional wisdom   
   >> agrees that the Liar Paradox is an open question   
   >> that has never been resolved.   
   >   
   > "Officially" doesn't refer to any consensus nor to any convention. It's   
   > basically the opposite of consensus and convention; that's the purpose   
   > of the word.   
   >   
   > If Princeton has a position statement on it, maybe that would do.   
   >   
      
   There is a broad consensus that Gödel's 1931 Incompleteness   
   theorem is correct and that the Liar Paradox is unresolved.   
      
   It easy to see that both are incorrect when using Proof   
   Theoretic Semantics. Most experts in math and logic seem   
   to simply not "believe in" Proof Theoretic Semantics because   
   they are sheep and only follow the herd.   
      
   --   
   Copyright 2026 Olcott

   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make 
   
   "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
   
   reliably computable.

   
      
   This required establishing a new foundation
   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)