*From*: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>*To*: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx*Date*: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:10:20 -0000

--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Joseph Polanik <jPolanik@...> wrote: > review the material I quoted from the Wikipedia article: > "According to formalism, the truths expressed in logic and > mathematics are not about numbers, sets, or triangles or any other > contensive subject matter ? in fact, they aren't 'about' anything > at all. They are syntactic forms whose shapes and locations have > no meaning unless they are given an interpretation (or semantics)." > in what way does that contradict the claim that syntax is not > sufficient for semantics? Let's try paraphasing that. I am sitting down sucking on a lemon. I remark that the lemon is sour. Joe overhears this, and asks "In what way does that contradict the claim that chocolate does not taste good?" I am at a loss for words. I am not sure how to respond. But I do wonder what Joe has been smoking lately. Regards, Neil ========================================= Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/

**References**:**[Wittrs] Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics***From:*Joseph Polanik

- » [Wittrs] Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics- Joseph Polanik
- » [Wittrs] Re: Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics- iro3isdx
- » [Wittrs] Re: Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics- SWM
- » [Wittrs] Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics- Joseph Polanik
- » [Wittrs] Re: Syntax and Semantics in Mathematics - iro3isdx