[FOM] consistency and completeness in natural language

[Torkel Franzen]

Dean Buckner says:

  >I would still like to undestand how the variables in Torkel's sentences are
  >meant to be read.

  In a suitable manner, depending on the context. In logic, people are
well aware of the occasional importance of making use-mention
distinctions explicit, but also of the frequent advisability of
setting such details aside in informal expositions. Hence Neil's
comment in his earlier posting in this thread, "I eschew the use of
corner quotes, since the reader will be able to supply them in
context". I'm sure that anybody who can follow the discussion can also
decide when a Gödel sentence for S is to be substituted for "G" in my
comments, and when a term designating a Gödel sentence for S is
to be substituted for "G". Of course in some presentations, it is
advisable to consistently use a notation that makes such distinctions
explicit, and I do so in my book on the topic of extensions by
reflection.

---
Torkel Franzen