InPitzotl

A correct understanding of the question is comprised of relating it to a request for bananas. How this fits in to the world is how one goes about goin...

Nonsense. There are people who have this "crucial element", and yet, have no clue what that question means. If experience is "the crucial" element, wh...

I'm detecting a few problems here. The question isn't about experiencing; it's about understanding. If I ask a person, "Can you go to the store and pi...

There absolutely is a significant difference. How are you going to teach anything, artificial or biological, what a banana is if all you give it are s...

I'm a bit confused here. Is your translation tool a robot?

Why is it a prerequisite?

That's not a great example. Let's say person A does indeed say: "Trump is an asshole, and is a nice guy." Does that mean Person A said something contr...

Corrected.

1. Item number 2 is true 2. The number of true statements in this list is not 2. 3. Puppies are evil co-conspirators with aliens from Haley's comet se...

Understood, but the best I can do is link to context. @"TheMadFool" mentioned it, but there was something silly there with Fitch only applying to true...

Probably none; this was stated by TMF, and the view appears to be held by Olivier5 (haven't caught up here; you've likely already met).

You have no choice. Have to be proposed in order to... what?

Wrong battle. I already know your position; you're now proselytizing.

You're confusing "antirealist"/"realist" with "unrealistic"/"realistic"... the terms convey completely different things. A realist (in this particular...

Antirealistic != unrealistic

Because p -> Kp was stated. Apparently some people do. It's an antirealist position; the p doesn't exist until it's proposed, and it isn't true until ...

p: <- the false proposition. q: <- the true proposition. q = ~p <- makes true proposition q out of false proposition p. Does your proof need a true pr...

Charitably, you take a false proposition p. You extend that by building a true proposition ¬p from it. You then use ¬p as you would any true propositi...

Which argument are you referring to?

I think you mean that if p is a falsehood, and q = ¬p, then q is true. So you have a falsehood p, and a truth q. So if there's logic requiring q to be...

I don't think you're quite following this. 1. Let q=¬p. 2. Then ¬p?K¬p is simply q?Kq 3. q?Kq is the same as p?Kp with change of labels. 1: I'm just d...

What's wrong with it?

I'm fine with that. Here, I've analyzed TMP's latest proofs, and don't have any particular issues with them, outside of the fact that they could proba...

Lexical has another sense: "relating to or of the nature of a lexicon or dictionary". That's closer to what is meant. "Lexically" in this particular s...

Not my concern. I'm not bound by your theories that propositions require a proposer, so I don't have to name one. If you can't find one, once again, t...

No, Olivier5, we haven't been through "this", because "this" refers to what you just linked to. That "this" is a post where I pointed out your bolded ...

That's fine, and I have no problem with that per se, except that you did explicitly appeal to the "makes no sense to say" criteria (which you even bol...

On October 1, 2021, I caused a computer to generate statements that are accurate representations of states of affairs. The computer generated those st...

What do you mean by "then"? The hidden premise here is that in order for the computer to create a proposition, the computer needs to distinguish propo...

My computer hasn't the ability to distinguish a proposition from garbage.

We just finished this. Proposition 6 was a proposition on October 1, 2021, at 10:03:44pm. At that time, nobody knew what proposition 6 was. But at tha...

Let q=¬p. Then ¬p?K¬p is simply q?Kq, which is the same as p?Kp (under a change in labels).

(edited: obsolete comment) Thanks @"TheMadFool"!

(edited: obsolete comment)

I'm confused. You're now saying my program understands things? I think we're done. Clarify your position, then get back to me if you want to engage me...

Sure; I'm fine with that too, so long as we don't suppose proposers understand things. Of course. I programmed it to generate true propositions. Compu...

It doesn't lead me anywhere. I already knew all of this stuff. But it implies that a proposition does not need a "proposer". It also implies that a pr...

Sure. Mmmm... sort of. Person A can write an English sentence on a sheet of paper in the form of a string of some length of English letters, spaces, a...

But that still has nothing to do with whether propositions are true or false. Consider that we humans repeat things humans say all of the time, at the...

This must be some new meaning of "exactly like" that I have been previously unaware of. The way I read "exactly like", it means something like "like i...

A recording plays back something that happened in the past. Proposition 6 didn't "exist" in any form at all until 10:03:44pm October 1; unless we're a...

Oooooh! What a great question! I think this naturally falls out of our agency. We use our senses to sense the world; as we do so, we create world mode...

I still feel like you're playing catch up from your poor reading comprehension skills. You misunderstand even the basic nature of the problem. You kee...

Ultimately that's correct, but the gaps are really in details. Sorry, I misspoke here... what I meant was that in the OP that was what you quoted. TMF...

You were the one who asked me the question. You were also the one opening this thread with your OP, where you wrote this: ...and you were the one talk...

There was no paper. As mentioned, it was a 4K LG monitor. This actually happened; it was not a thought experiment. Yes, but more than that. I didn't j...

I do? Why then would I write this?: Yes. At 10:04:44pm. That's a funny use of the word "create". Incidentally, you also have funny uses of the word "a...

The point here is... well, phrased as a challenge, but really... to get Olivier5 to clarify some of his claims about when propositions exist, where th...

Hmmm... time... okay: from datetime import datetime import random import time random.seed() def make_string(): return ''.join((chr(65+random.randint(0...

I can sketch it out. You need some bootstrap capabilities outside of dictionaries... things like what humans have; e.g.: ...the ability to see. Add to...