1. Forum
  2. Newsgroups
  3. comp.ai.philosophy

  • Re: Back in 2020 I proved that Wittgenstein was correct all along

    From olcott@polcott333@gmail.com to sci.logic,comp.theory,sci.math,comp.ai.philosophy on Wed Jan 21 21:24:33 2026
    From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

    On 1/21/2026 2:29 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:
    On 21/01/2026 20:14, olcott wrote:
    On 1/21/2026 1:02 PM, Tristan Wibberley wrote:
    On 21/01/2026 15:14, olcott wrote:
    An BaseFact is an expression X of (natural or formal)
    language L that has been assigned the semantic property
    of True. (Similar to a math Axiom).

    Do you mean "statement" or really mean "expression" - understanding that >>> the term "expression" (of a language) includes things like "ngs lik"
    from this statement.


    It turns out that I must have remembered this from:

    *Russell’s Logical Atomism*
      the claim that the world consists of a plurality of
      independently existing things exhibiting qualities
      and standing in relations. According to logical
      atomism, all truths are ultimately dependent upon
      a layer of atomic facts, which consist either of a
      simple particular exhibiting a quality, or multiple
      simple particulars standing in a relation.
      https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-atomism/

    I bought his book a few decades ago.


    According to that link, Russel's 'expression' is more restrictive that Haskell Curry's, Curry considered "ngs lik" to be an expression while
    Russel is there said to consider "the King of France" to be an
    expression, I suppose giving the two noun phrases as the only two
    examples, as they do, is intended to exclude the supposition that "ngs
    lik" is an expression, which Curry allows. I wonder whether Curry misunderstood or adopted/formed a second school.


    If you are only going to play head games you will be ignored.
    It turns out the wellfounded proof theoretic semantics is the
    key frame-of-reference that proves I have been correct about
    all of these things all along.

    When we anchor Wittgenstein this way he too was right all along

    'True in Russell's system' means, as was
    said: proved in Russell's system; and
    'false in Russell's system' means: the
    opposite has been proved in Russell's system
    https://www.liarparadox.org/Wittgenstein.pdf

    is exactly wellfounded proof theoretic semantics
    --
    Copyright 2026 Olcott<br><br>

    My 28 year goal has been to make <br>
    "true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"<br>
    reliably computable.<br><br>

    This required establishing a new foundation<br>
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2