[FOM] Godel numbers, use, and mention
4mjmu at rogers.com
Wed Jun 4 19:23:34 EDT 2003
Dean Buckner wrote:
> Most of us would agree
> (A) It is improbable that Bacon wrote Macbeth
> (though some people including Cantor, as it happens - see
> would differ.) And we all agree that
> (B) It is probable that Shakepeare wrote Macbeth
> But if Shakespeare = Bacon, then, by Leibniz and from (B),
> (C) It is probable that Bacon wrote Macbeth
> which contradicts (A). From which (if we agree (A) and (B)), we agree
> Shakespeare <> Bacon.
> This could revolutionise our approach to criminal detection! It's certain
> that Jack the Ripper committed all the Whitechapel murders. But it's
> uncertain whether any of the "usual suspects" committed them. So, by
> Leibniz, we can rule them all out.
I sometimes wonder about these arguments surrounding use/mention,
referential opacity. Most of us agree with A) because we do not agree with
Shakespeare = Bacon. If we agreed with Shakespeare= Bacon, presumably most
of us would not agree with A. And then C would follow nicely.
The same with Frege's puzzle.
1) John believes p.
3) John believes q.
Many times, 3 is perfectly valid. So I'm not sure what you are trying to
More information about the FOM