
Re: Matheology § 224
Posted:
Apr 13, 2013 1:44 PM


On 13/04/2013 11:17 AM, fom wrote:
> > You think I do not understand how you are trying to > say something that may be relevant. I am trying to > get you to understand that it will be difficult > to succeed if you do not try to figure out what > paradigm of logic you may be trying to apply.
To fom, Alan, Peter, Frederick, et al.,
At this point _let's not go back and forth in vain_ . Peter asked me specifically what the relativity of truth value of a formula be in the context of language structure.
And I gave a clear cut example of an F being absolutely true in a M, and the truth of a F' being relativistic in the same M.
Would you or would you not understand, in that example, that the truth of a F' is relativistic as defined there?
If you don't acknowledge or refute that F' being relativistic, then I'm afraid the debate would go nowhere.
And I really don't see how we could go further discussing if you don't make an acknowledge or a technical refute on what I said about F'.
  There is no remainder in the mathematics of infinity.
NYOGEN SENZAKI 

