Banno

Well said. It's a statement without a truth value and hence not a proposition.

Your two premises (1 & 4) are contradictory. (5) is the least of your worries (runs for bomb shelter...)

You mean like jack believes Paris is the capital of France? Just a belief statement that happens to be false.

So what.

He can be the subject of a statement.

It seemed to me that Michael sorted the issue with T-sentences. I didn't follow your objection. I'd forgotten about the objections to Tarski's work. I...

So we note that having a statement refer to its own interpretation can produce problems, and disbar that process by introducing a meta language as Tar...

Being true is not like being red.

Not I. They are an agent and a statement.

It's pretty much the same as the one posted on my user page in the old forum. The only significant difference is that I no longer accept any statement...

Your observations about the syllogisms look right to me. My objection is a small one. I would reserve the word "logic" for deductive reasoning. Talk o...

If it's any consolation, I think I understand your view on belief being caused; and my objection is a relatively minor one. It's just that I get stuck...

OK, to those difference. I balk at talking about facts using the concept fact. Following Austin, I think talk of concepts leads too easily to the phil...

Yes - I agree with all of that, although I might say it slightly differently.

Any belief can be said. On this we agree. Also, there are unstated beliefs. One thing I've realised in this thread is the extent to which I have mixed...

Good to hear. I agree. While I like the idea of looking for agreement, I can't agree with this. Since the meaning of a word is its use, knowing-that r...

As Michael says, yes there is. It talks about its own interpretation.

I agree. For now.

one possibility. So is the metalanguage treatment.

sentences about truth and falsity are not well formed in first order logic. So there is no translation of L nor L'.

I was chatting to @"Sam26" earlier about similar issues. One simple rejoinder is to reject the liar statement as incapable of an interpretation. That ...

This is a consequence of what a belief is - a part of the explanation of an action. Explaining is not the sort of thing we can do without language, su...

Ah, cool. Thanks for today. I am reading the IEP article you posted closely. Sleep well.

Hm. Complexity. "The present king of France is bald" is a statement but not a proposition. It is neither true nor false because it says nothing. It is...

Calling me names will not change the fact that induction and abduction are invalid. Hume's point stands.

No, they are not. A fact is better understood as what is true despite your belief - or consensus.

Indeed; not all your beliefs are stated. And yet you persist in replying in English.

http://www.solvingforpattern.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/deductive-inductive-abductive-syllogisms.png Neat diagram. Notice that the syllogisms unde...

Well, at the least your actions in replying to me belie any doubt you might express that we are having a discussion in English.

And yet it is true that this sentence is in English. We can be certain of it. Just drop the word "absolute" and you can avoid vast quantities of philo...

Hmm. You've introduced the term correlation here. And as a result, lost me. Is a correlation a truth? Here's my grammar again, just to be clear. State...

Sure we are. But then, we are both confident that we are talking epistemology on a web site in English. If that were not the case, how would our discu...

So because of your uncertainty we cannot begin the discussion. That is, we need some sort of certainty in order to get started.

X-) Nothing in philosophy is simple. To the detriment of philosophy. There are thousands of books and articles on justification, and whatever i say he...

Suppose you are white and move the queen's pawn, aiming at a Queen's gambit. Your opponent says "you can't do that!" How do you proceed?

You appear to agree that all beliefs are statable, then deny that they are propositional. It might be my confusion of statement and proposition, but d...

The belief is shown by the deception. OK, I'll take your point and adjust the definition to belief being the best explanation for some coherent set of...

I don't follow this paragraph at all. It seems to contradict itself. Can you clarify?

Wouldn't such behaviour be evidence of another, overriding belief? Not telling the axe-weilding thug at your door where someone is, is evidence of a c...

OK. Let's look a the bishop example one more time. Can we agree that it would not be viable to play chess against someone who doubted the movement of ...

I'm asking, why the sometimes? Can you give an example of a belief not shown by behaviour?

Ha. If I am right in my explanation of your behaviour, then I have set out your belief.

Well, we might try the following... If we are going to use B to justify A, then we ought be more confident in B than in A. It would be odd to attempt ...

Damn it. I'm procrastinating again. But this is so much easier than cutting grass and building chicken coop doors.

There's nothing new here, is there? And again, for the purposes of this thread we are assuming there are such things and delving into their nature. On...

This is excellent: This is a transcendental argument. See https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/transcendental-arguments/ They need to be treated with gr...

Thermodynamics is part of physics, not metaphysics.

And both can provide good examples of hinge propositions.

I think it a good rule of thumb that profundity leads to error.

And I am saying that they are simply a given.