Fw: ' possible' reply to Bruno Marchal

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 11:49:55 +0200

Brent Meeker wrote:

> > However, in defense of Bruno, he uses [] as "provable" and
> > <> as "consistent", which seem pretty well defined within a
> > given axiomatic system. It is when he equates "provable"
> > with "necessary in all possible worlds" that I think I hear
> > a train.


I only equate "p provable by a consistent machine M" with
"p true in all accessible (by M) world/states-relative-to-M (if
any)"


Bruno
Received on Wed Aug 28 2002 - 02:53:44 PDT