🚀 go-pugleaf

On 2008-05-05, in sci.logic, Daryl McCullough wrote:
> Also, your definition 2 doesn't accomplish anything. You're
> explaining the predicate "is true" in terms of the predicate
> "corresponds to an actual state of affairs". But that phrase
> is no better defined than "is true". Which sentences correspond
> to an actual state of affairs, and which don't?

"In order to tell whether a picture is true or false we must compare it
with reality..." -- just like to tell whether a portrait is true we
must have a peek at the person it depicts. Admittedly it's a bit
obscure what this might amount to in case of such sentences as

 A sentence is meaningful if and only if it is a picture of a possible
 state of affairs.

 It is instructive to consider the first incompleteness theorem in
 a purely recursion theoretic formulation.

 The doctrine that a meaningful sentence is a picture of a possible
 state of affairs is erudite.

 Newberry is confused on matters logical.

and so on.

-- 
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xortec.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
 - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus