Conceptual Truth can be understood as math
Posted: Mon Aug 12, 2019 6:36 pm
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/
If we make the analytic versus synthetic distinction this way:
An analytic sentence is any sentence that can be verified as
completely true entirely on the basis of the meaning of its words.
The meaning of the words of every analytic sentence is defined entirely using other words, recursively until every nuance of the meaning of every word has been exhaustively defined in terms of other words.
It turns out that the body of conceptual knowledge already works this way. The only way that we can know that a conceptual expression of language is true is by the full compositional meaning of its words (including its discourse context).
The actual meaning of words comes from the defined stipulated relations that words have to each other. True(x) is merely satisfying one or more of these stipulated relations.
The entire body of conceptual knowledge can be formalized as tuples of finite strings where the first finite string is the named relation to the remaining finite string arguments:
Tuple(">", "5", "3")
Tuple("type", "cat", "animal")
Tuple("type", "animal", "organism") // Now a rule-of-inference has been defined
Tuple("type", "gasoline", "fuel")
Tuple("purchase", "buyer", "seller", "item", "price")
Tuple("→", "p", "q", 0)
Tuple("∧", "p", "q", 0)
X = "It is raining outside"
Y = "I go outside"
Z = "I will get wet"
E = "X ∧ Y → Z"
X
Y
X ∧ Y → Z
------------
∴ Z
Evaluate(E, True(X), True(Y))
∴ "I will get wet"
Copyright 2019 Pete Olcott
If we make the analytic versus synthetic distinction this way:
An analytic sentence is any sentence that can be verified as
completely true entirely on the basis of the meaning of its words.
The meaning of the words of every analytic sentence is defined entirely using other words, recursively until every nuance of the meaning of every word has been exhaustively defined in terms of other words.
It turns out that the body of conceptual knowledge already works this way. The only way that we can know that a conceptual expression of language is true is by the full compositional meaning of its words (including its discourse context).
The actual meaning of words comes from the defined stipulated relations that words have to each other. True(x) is merely satisfying one or more of these stipulated relations.
The entire body of conceptual knowledge can be formalized as tuples of finite strings where the first finite string is the named relation to the remaining finite string arguments:
Tuple(">", "5", "3")
Tuple("type", "cat", "animal")
Tuple("type", "animal", "organism") // Now a rule-of-inference has been defined
Tuple("type", "gasoline", "fuel")
Tuple("purchase", "buyer", "seller", "item", "price")
Tuple("→", "p", "q", 0)
Tuple("∧", "p", "q", 0)
X = "It is raining outside"
Y = "I go outside"
Z = "I will get wet"
E = "X ∧ Y → Z"
X
Y
X ∧ Y → Z
------------
∴ Z
Evaluate(E, True(X), True(Y))
∴ "I will get wet"
Copyright 2019 Pete Olcott