Search found 3 matches
- Wed May 13, 2026 3:27 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: Who here understands how proof theoretic semantics eliminates undecidability?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1052
Re: Who here understands how proof theoretic semantics eliminates undecidability?
Apparently no one. % This sentence is not true. ?- LP = not(true(LP)). LP = not(true(LP)). ?- unify_with_occurs_check(LP, not(true(LP))). false. Prolog finally once and for all resolves the Liar Paradox as semantically incoherent within the analytical framework of Proof Theoretical Semantics. It do...
- Tue May 12, 2026 7:58 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: What is truth?
- Replies: 754
- Views: 213259
Re: What is truth?
The common sense understanding of truth is the correspondence theory of truth. From now on referred to as CTT. If the CTT is true,what does it refer to? Another CTT? Depending on your perspective that is a tautology or an infinite regress. So what is truth? PS;The CTT is the theory that a propositi...
- Tue May 12, 2026 4:12 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: Who here understands how proof theoretic semantics eliminates undecidability?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1052
Who here understands how proof theoretic semantics eliminates undecidability?
Proof-theoretic semantics is inherently inferential, as it is inferential activity which manifests itself in proofs. It thus belongs to inferentialism (a term coined by Brandom, see his 1994; 2000) according to which inferences and the rules of inference establish the meaning of expressions. Schroe...