From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!mtecv2!academ01!iordonez Wed Sep 16 21:23:26 EDT 1992
Article 6910 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!mtecv2!academ01!iordonez
>From: iordonez@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Ivan Ordonez-Reinoso)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Marvin Minsky's Conscious Machines
Message-ID: <iordonez.716505530@academ01>
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:18:50 GMT
References: <iordonez.714442640@academ01> <86891@netnews.upenn.edu> <iordonez.715293767@academ01> <1992Sep9.025119.15500@uwm.edu>
Sender: usenet@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx
Lines: 41
Nntp-Posting-Host: academ01.mty.itesm.mx

markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>In article <iordonez.715293767@academ01> iordonez@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Ivan Ordonez-Reinoso) writes:
>>>>P: This sentence is not true.
>>
>>I don't know if this is supposed to prove that sentence P is formalizable,
>>but anyway please note that in my original post I claimed that P is not
>>formalizable because it contains a "not TRUE" part, and not because it
>>is self referent. The concept "truth" is not formalizable.

>This sentence implies that the concept of "truth" is irrelevent and immaterial
>regarding the issue of logical paradox and that only the existence of
>self-reference and implication matter.

OK. Let's go again. This is sentence P:

P: Sentence P is not true.

Lets define property T:

T: To be true.

So P can be expressed as:

P: Sentence P does not have property T.

IMHO, formalizing sentence P implies formalizing property T, or else P
would be incomplete. Matthew P Wiener wrote in another note:

>Tarski's theorem is about the non-formalizability of a general truth
>predicate.  It says nothing about particular instantiations of truth.
>In particular, B&E show how to formalize "This sentence is true".

Please note that property T does not contain a particular instantiation
of truth, but a general, abstract and unformalizable concept: _To be
true_. Given this, I don't think that the concept of truth is irrelevant
at all; au contraire, it is the very core of the paradox, while self
reference is the not-so-important part.

--Ivan Ordonez-Reinoso
iordonez@omega.mty.itesm.mx


