Under what language context do you make that statement?PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 2:09 amYou don't seem to understand what linguistic context is.Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 9:50 pmStill failed in context.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 7:04 pm
There exists people in the world such that these people anticipate refuting my halting problem proof refutation.
There are certain types of people that anticipate refuting your halting problem proof refutation.
Conceptual Truth can be understood as math
Re: Truth can be understood as math
Re: Truth can be understood as math
A linguistic context is all the information required (grammar, semantics) for interpreting the intended meaning of symbols.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 2:09 am You don't seem to understand what linguistic context is.
Now, you could determine that this sentence is grammatically and semantically true "Pete is wasting his time.", but can you infer my intent in saying it?
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
http://blog.tnsemployeeinsights.com/wp- ... ocess3.pngSkepdick wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:43 pmA linguistic context is all the information required (grammar, semantics) for interpreting the intended meaning of symbols.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 2:09 am You don't seem to understand what linguistic context is.
The intended meaning is impossible to directly access. The communication process does not allow this.
The best that the communication process allows is the decoding of the stipulated message.
Re: Truth can be understood as math
That's pretty silly given Shannon's definition of "communication" - all the possible ways in which one mind can affect another.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 7:57 pm The intended meaning is impossible to directly access. The communication process does not allow this.
The best that the communication process allows is the decoding of the stipulated message.
I keep having to refer you to Siri, Google Home and Alexa etc. They sure respond to requests and understand intent.
In fact (from the Alexa documentation itself).
Create new INTENT
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
No mention of minds:Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:30 amThat's pretty silly given Shannon's definition of "communication" - all the possible ways in which one mind can affect another.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Thu Aug 22, 2019 7:57 pm The intended meaning is impossible to directly access. The communication process does not allow this.
The best that the communication process allows is the decoding of the stipulated message.
I keep having to refer you to Siri, Google Home and Alexa etc. They sure respond to requests and understand intent.
In fact (from the Alexa documentation itself).
Create new INTENT
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/t ... ntropy.pdf
The ONLY aspects of intent that can be acquired by Siri are those aspects of intent that were encoded in the message.
If a person with a hidden agenda is communicating their intent remains hidden.
Your link did not work.
Re: Truth can be understood as math
Liar! It's on the 1st page of the book.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:27 pm No mention of minds:
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/t ... ntropy.pdf
https://ibb.co/vLFqxR3
https://ibb.co/xSYBKKj
Nonsense. The agenda of every speaking mind is always to affect the mind that is listening. The question is: "Affect in what way?"PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:27 pm The ONLY aspects of intent that can be acquired by Siri are those aspects of intent that were encoded in the message.
If a person with a hidden agenda is communicating their intent remains hidden.
If the speaking mind has no intent of affecting listening minds - the speaking mind always has a choice to remain silent.
Ooops. https://developer.amazon.com/fr/docs/cu ... slots.html
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
You did not cite a book, thus you are a nitwit for calling me a Liar.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:44 pmLiar! It's on the 1st page of the book.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 3:27 pm No mention of minds:
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/t ... ntropy.pdf
https://ibb.co/vLFqxR3
https://ibb.co/xSYBKKj
Re: Truth can be understood as math
I cited the author, you incorrectly inferred the transmission medium.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:07 pm You did not cite a book, thus you are a nitwit for calling me a Liar.
That you were unaware of the book is Argument from ignorance.
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
Your cite was poor. Unless you cite the book, the paper is the specified default.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:11 pmI cited the author, you incorrectly inferred the transmission medium.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:07 pm You did not cite a book, thus you are a nitwit for calling me a Liar.
That you were unaware of the book is Argument from ignorance.
Re: Truth can be understood as math
The truth was poor? No! It is just refusing to fit in that tiny box you are trying to shove it in.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:32 pm Your cite was poor. Unless you cite the book, the paper is the specified default.
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
You initially gave a very lousy citation.Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:04 pmThe truth was poor? No! It is just refusing to fit in that tiny box you are trying to shove it in.PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 4:32 pm Your cite was poor. Unless you cite the book, the paper is the specified default.
The second citation (including the actual page of the book), was perfect.
Re: Truth can be understood as math
It was true. Why does it matter if it was lousy?
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
To verify that it was actually true, and to see it in context to more fully understand what was meant.
In any case although the point is relevant in some contexts it is not relevant in my context.
Ultimately I am only proving that Gödel Incompleteness and Tarski Undefinability are incorrect
so subtle nuance of the communication process such as body language are outside of the scope
of my investigation.
The broadest sense of my investigation extends no further than the encoding and decoding of
messages as per the conventional communication process link that I provided.
Re: Truth can be understood as math
You said you had an algorithm for that.
Well, that's just boring!PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:34 pm The broadest sense of my investigation extends no further than the encoding and decoding of
messages as per the conventional communication process link that I provided.
You are trying to prove truth is communicable e.g serializable a.k.a marshalling. Obviously all finite objects are serialisable, or the transmission would never end.
Last edited by Skepdick on Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:55 pm
Re: Truth can be understood as math
Ultimately I am only proving that Gödel IncompletenessSkepdick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:41 pmYou said you had an algorithm for that.
Well, that's just boring!PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 8:34 pm The broadest sense of my investigation extends no further than the encoding and decoding of
messages as per the conventional communication process link that I provided.
You are trying to prove truth is communicable e.g serializable a.k.a marshalling.
Obviously all finite objects are serialisable, or the transmission would never end.
and Tarski Undefinability are incorrect