XPost: sci.math, comp.theory   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/6/2025 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   > olcott kirjoitti 5.12.2025 klo 19.21:   
   >> On 12/5/2025 2:52 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>> olcott kirjoitti 4.12.2025 klo 16.46:   
   >>>> On 12/4/2025 3:50 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>> olcott kirjoitti 3.12.2025 klo 17.09:   
   >>>>>> On 12/3/2025 4:36 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>> olcott kirjoitti 2.12.2025 klo 17.26:   
   >>>>>>>> On 12/2/2025 3:49 AM, Mikko wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> dbush kirjoitti 29.11.2025 klo 20.19:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 11/29/2025 1:07 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/29/2025 11:53 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-11-29, olcott  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Any expression of language that is proven true entirely   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the basis of its meaning expressed in language is   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> a semantic tautology.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> A tautology is an expression of logic which is true for all   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> combinations of the truth values of its variables and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> propositions,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> which is, of course, regardless of what they mean/represent.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> I did not say tautology. I said semantic tautology.   
   >>>>>>>>>>> I am defining a new thing under the Sun.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> *Semantic tautology is stipulated to mean*   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Any expression of language that is proven true entirely   
   >>>>>>>>>>> on the basis of its meaning expressed in language.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> So in other words, "semantic tautology" is just another term   
   >>>>>>>>>> for "definition".   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> A definition gives a new word for something.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> A semantic tautology is a verbose expression that may take some   
   >>>>>>>>> effort   
   >>>>>>>>> to understand but once understood is onderstood to say nothing.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> A semantic tautology might be considered the   
   >>>>>>>> complete definition of a a word by providing   
   >>>>>>>> the complete definition of every word in this   
   >>>>>>>> definition recursively all the way down until   
   >>>>>>>> every one of these words is completely defined.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Semantic tautology is stipulated to mean any expression of language   
   >>>>>>> that is proven true entirely on the basis of its meaning expressed   
   >>>>>>> in language.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> This includes expressions that do not define anything.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>> It does not.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> For example, "A square is not a triangle" is seen to be true on the   
   >>>>> basis of the meanings of the words but does not define anything.   
   >>>   
   >>>> That is deduced from the definitions of square and triangle.   
   >>>> They are defined with mutually exclusive properties.   
   >>>   
   >>> Nice to see that you don't disagree with my observation that "A square   
   >>> is not a triangle" is seen to be true on the basis of the menanings of   
   >>> the words but does not define anything   
   >>   
   >> In other words you are trying to get away with   
   >> saying the dictionaries are entirely comprised   
   >> of meaningless gibberish, and not even a single   
   >> word is defined.   
   >   
   > There are two kinds of dictionaries. One kind is dictionaries that   
   > define words of one language in terms of words of another language.   
   > There is no circularity there. The other kind describes the meanings   
   > of wirds in terms of words of the same language. They are circular   
   > and the descriptions are often incomplete or inexact. Dictionaries   
   > of this kind are indeed useless to readers who don't already know   
   > the meanings of most of the words from other sources.   
   >   
      
   You like Quine could not tell the difference between   
   an acyclic directed graph and one with cycles.   
      
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Dogmas_of_Empiricism#Analytici   
   y_and_circularity   
      
      
   Rudolf Carnap Meaning Postulates addresses Quine   
   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).   
      
   Here it is in Olcott's Minimal Type Theory   
   ∀x (Bachelor(x) := ~Married(x) ∧ Male(x) ∧ Adult(x))   
   Bachelor(x) {is defined as} ~Married(x) ∧ Male(x) ∧ Adult(x)   
      
   Minimal Type Theory Syntax   
   https://philarchive.org/archive/PETMTT-4v2   
      
   --   
   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)