Message-ID:

Usage: fortune -P [] -a [xsz] [Q: [file]] [rKe9] -v6[+] dataspec ... inputdir

computers / comp.ai.philosophy / Re: Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error

Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error

<ucop44$2uoou$1@dont-email.me>

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=11738&group=comp.ai.philosophy#11738

copy link Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic comp.ai.philosophy

Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: polco...@gmail.com (olcott)
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 20:07:14 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <ucop44$2uoou$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 01:07:16 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="144fab19172a9101dc6c30e547e7668c";
logging-data="3105566"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX194QZZ7kYMgddc9uAhG4Thu"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/102.14.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XYNT+I3+HAAjP52hhFEJob9/5ts=
Content-Language: en-US

by: olcott - Thu, 31 Aug 2023 01:07 UTC

Gödel incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error
in the same way that the conclusion {the Moon orbits the Earth} is not a
logical consequence of the premise {cats are mammals}.

Provability ONLY validates logical consequence. Whenever a conclusion is
not provable from its premises we have the non-sequitur error. This
remains true when the only premises are the axioms of the formal system.

--
Copyright 2023 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error

<9XRHM.854575$TPw2.444564@fx17.iad>

copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/computers/article-flat.php?id=11739&group=comp.ai.philosophy#11739

copy link Newsgroups: comp.theory sci.logic comp.ai.philosophy

Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx17.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.ai.philosophy
References: <ucop44$2uoou$1@dont-email.me>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <ucop44$2uoou$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <9XRHM.854575$TPw2.444564@fx17.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 21:22:13 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2364

by: Richard Damon - Thu, 31 Aug 2023 01:22 UTC

On 8/30/23 9:07 PM, olcott wrote:
> Gödel incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error
> in the same way that the conclusion {the Moon orbits the Earth} is not a
> logical consequence of the premise {cats are mammals}.
>
> Provability ONLY validates logical consequence. Whenever a conclusion is
> not provable from its premises we have the non-sequitur error. This
> remains true when the only premises are the axioms of the formal system.
>
>

What is "non-squitur" about it?

Do you enen understand what you are saying?

What doesn't follow?

You don't seem to understand how logic works.

The statment of G in F is TRUE, as has been proven in Meta-F, which has
been constructed in a manner that statements shown to be true in Meta-F
that don't contain any references to things that only exist in Meta-F
(and G doesn't contain such a reference) are also true in F.

The statement G has also been proven (with logic Meta-F) to not be
provable in F.

Thus G is proven to be an example of a statement True in F, and not
provable in F.

The Definition of "completness" for a logic system is that ALL True
statements in the system are provable, and a system is Incomplete if
there exists a True statement that is not provable.

Since G meets that criteria, F is not complete.

The proof applies to ALL system with sufficient axioms to provide the
needed basics of Natural Numbers, thus all such system are, by
necessity, and so proven, to be incomplete.

Your denial just shows your ignorance.

Subject	Author
Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error	olcott
Re: Incompleteness is more aptly construed as the non-sequitur error	Richard Damon