XPost: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.math   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/20/2025 7:14 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:   
   > On 17/11/2025 22:59, olcott wrote:   
   >   
   >> Ultimately it is essentially the Liar Paradox in disguise.   
   >   
   > Yes, it is, I'm pretty sure (I haven't gone through it in such detail to   
   > satisfy all audiences).   
   >   
      
   If it is the Liar Paradox in disguise and the   
   Liar Paradox is simply semantically ill-formed   
   then the Halting Problem and everything isomorphic   
   to the Liar Paradox are also merely errors and   
   can be written off as such.   
      
   When we do this then we are on our way to making   
   "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"   
   AKA Analytic(Olcott) computable. My whole goal for   
   28 years.   
      
   > It's roughly evaluation of the contradictory G (as defined by Olcott in   
   > an inconsistent suppositional axiom extension) as opposed to judgement   
   > of that defining axiom (where judgement would be evaluation in a   
   > partiality monad instead of directly or in the identity monad).   
   >   
   > Where we have the craziness of nonstrict evaluation such as in Haskell,   
   > a partiality monad can be used for judgement and then used to construct   
   > evaluation using the monad's catamorphism with a simple empty loop.   
   >   
   >   
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make   
   "true on the basis of meaning" computable.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)