XPost: sci.math, comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy   
   From: tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk   
      
   On 16/01/2026 00:24, olcott wrote:   
   > On 1/15/2026 5:10 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:   
   >> I understand a schematic system is one whose deduction rules or,   
   >> perhaps, inference rules (if there's a difference) are specified as   
   >> axioms of the same system.   
   >>   
   >> 1. Can that be a syntactical system or a formal system just as well and   
   >> still be called a schematic system?   
   >>   
   >> 2. Suppose it's a positive intuitionist system, what are the most   
   >> notable things to consider vis-a-vis extensions?   
   >>   
   >   
   > A formal system anchored in proof-theoretic semantics   
   > with PA as its axioms expresses all of PA and is not   
   > incomplete.   
      
   Well done, have a cookie.   
      
   --   
   Tristan Wibberley   
      
   The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except   
   citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,   
   of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it   
   verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to   
   promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation   
   of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general   
   superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train   
   any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that   
   will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)