On 4/18/2013 1:46 AM, fom wrote: > On 4/18/2013 1:42 AM, WM wrote: >> On 18 Apr., 08:19, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: >> >>> WM cannot be an ultrafinitist and >>> expect others to not hold him to >>> task for it. >> >> There is a third way: potential infinity. >> > > WM had been given examples of how that > third way is implemented *mathematically*. > > WM cannot understand his own beliefs. >
"There is currently no generally accepted explanation of Moore's Paradox in the philosophical literature. However, while Moore's Paradox remains a philosophical curiosity, Moorean-type sentences are used by logicians, computer scientists, and those working in the artificial intelligence community as examples of cases in which a knowledge, belief, or information system is unsuccessful in updating its knowledge/belief/information store in light of new or novel information"