Date: Mar 3, 2013 12:43 AM
Author: Graham Cooper
Subject: How can NO LOGICIAN follow this argument??
Look for the phrase CONSTRUCT-A-SENTENCE

> [DARYL]

> Fix a coding for arithmetic, that is, a way to associate a unique

> natural number with each statement of arithmetic. In terms of this

> coding, a truth predicate Tr(x) is a formula with the following

> property: For any statement S in the language of arithmetic,

> Tr(#S) <-> S

> holds (where #S means the natural number coding the sentence S).

> If Tr(x) is a formula of arithmetic, then using techniques

> developed by Godel, we can construct a sentence L such that

> L <-> ~Tr(#L)

>

> [JESSE]

> Goedel *explicitly* constructed a formula P and showed

> that both (1) and (2) were true of P.

[HERC]

"We can construct a formula"

/\

||

\/

"We can construct *ANY* formula"

T |- any formula

ex contradictione sequitur quodlibet

from a contradiction, anything follows

http://blockprolog.com/EX-CONTRADICTIONE-SEQUITUR-QUODLIBET.png

-----------------

Godel and Tarski proofs were PRE AXIOMATIC SET THEORY!

Herc

--

TOM: You can't agree with this!

BETTY: That's right!

PAMMY: I don't agree!

THE WOMEN'S INCOMPREHENSION THEORY!