Re: Readings in (some of the) foundations of mathematics --- tree of knowledge

On 06/07/2026 20:51, olcott wrote:
> On 7/6/2026 5:13 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 04/07/2026 16:24, olcott wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2026 1:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 03/07/2026 18:23, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 7/3/2026 3:41 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 02/07/2026 17:45, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 7/2/2026 1:44 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> That depends on the semantic system. Often the meaning of the word
>>>>>>>> "cat" indeed involves that what is called a "cat" is also called
>>>>>>>> an "animal" but there are other posiibilities. Conseqently, the
>>>>>>>> sentence "cats are animals" can be a semantic tautology that tells
>>>>>>>> nothing about the real world, 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It tells us exactly one thing about the real world 1 != 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A tautology tells nothing about the real world. Sometimes one can
>>>>>> have a false impression that something is said about the real world
>>>>>> when a tautology is presented. But that impression is a consequence
>>>>>> of insufficient or invalid consideration of logic and semantics.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Stipulative definition of relations between finite
>>>>> strings is the only way that these finite strings
>>>>> acquire semantic meaning.
>>>>
>>>> For some kind of formal semantics where the meaning of a fintite
>>>> string is another finite string (or perhaps, in some cases, the
>>>> same). That way does not get any real world semantics, though
>>>> it can extend real world semantics if you already have some.
>>>
>>> All of meaning expressed in language works this same way.
>>
>> There is nore meaning expessed in language than you seem to be aware of.
> 
> I don't want to keep repeating all the details
> that prove this hundreds and hundreds of times.
> If you cannot remember what I already told you 20
> times then you are too disrespectful.

You have never proven the absense of any other meaning expressed
in language.

-- 
Mikko