Meaning, Presuppositions, Truth-relevance, Godel's Theorem andthe Liar Paradox
in [Logic]
|
Prev: Meaning, Presuppositions, Truth-relevance, Godel's Theorem and the Liar Paradox
Next: UK's Davidson believes some Naturals >1 are neither prime nor composite; so there must be something wrong in UK math education #5.07 Correcting Math
From: Nam Nguyen on 9 Aug 2010 13:01 Daryl McCullough wrote: > > I guess there are two kinds of philosophy: the kind that takes > murky concepts and attempts to make them clear, and the kind that > takes clear concepts and attempts to make them murky. Identifying > the presuppositions in natural language is an example of the first, > inserting presuppositions into first-order arithmetic statements > is an example of the second. Ah! But there are also 2 kinds of reasoning as well: one based on the precise mechanical-style proofs via axioms and rules of inference, and one based on the intuitive concepts of some purported model of a language! The former would force a clarity, and in the later murkiness would be inevitable! -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Normally, we do not so much look at things as overlook them. Zen Quotes by Alan Watt ----------------------------------------------------------- |