SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2311.17930

Pragmatic Nonsense

Abstract

Inspired by the early Wittgenstein's concept of nonsense (meaning that which lies beyond the limits of language), we investigate two different types of nonsense: formal nonsense and pragmatic nonsense. The simpler notion of formal nonsense is defined in accordance with Tarski's semantic theory of truth; the notion of pragmatic nonsense is in turn formulated within the context of the theory of pragmatic truth, also known as quasi-truth, as formalized by da Costa and his collaborators. Pragmatic nonsense extends formal nonsense, the same way da Costa's pragmatic truth is an extension of Tarski's definition of truth. An expression is thus considered formally nonsensical in case the formal criteria required for the assignment of any truth-value (whether true, false, pragmatically true, or pragmatically false) are not met; and an expression, or even a well-formed formula, is considered pragmatically nonsensical if either the formal or the pragmatic criteria of relevance (inscribed within the context of scientific practice) required for the assignment of any pragmatic truth-value (pragmatically true or pragmatically false) are not met. We also introduce the concept of strictly pragmatic truth, which excludes pragmatic nonsense and necessarily depends on certain criteria of relevance, unlike the original definition of pragmatic truth/quasi-truth.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ricardo P. Cavassane, Itala M. L. D'Ottaviano, Felipe S. Abrahão. 2023-11-26. Pragmatic Nonsense. https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.17930

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

There is no maximal $K$-degree

The Kolmogorov complexity of a string characterize how complex it is to describe the string. If every prefix of a real $x$ is more complex to describe than every prefix (of the same length) of real $y$, then it is seen as $x$ is more complex to describe than $y$. It is wondered if there is a real $x$ so that no other reals are strictly more complex (to describe) than $x$. The behavior of Kolmogorov complexity functions generated by reals (namely $n\mapsto$ the minimal description length of the real) is quite chaos. Therefore, it is widely believed that there are many reals that are maximally complex to describe. For instance, it is conjectured that all random enough reals have maximal $K$-degree. In this paper, it is shown that there is no real with maximal $K$-degree. Actually, for almost all real $x$, we can uniformly computably find another real whose $K$-degree is strictly above $x$.

math.LO

Quadruples and cubes

We prove, in $\mathsf{ZFC}$, that the $\lambda$-terraced cube relation fails whenever $\lambda$ is an uncountable cardinal. The corresponding terraced relation for quadruples fails for every $\lambda$. If $\lambda$ is $\aleph_0$ then the pretinent terraced relation has consistency strength of at least one Woodin cardinal. We prove positive polarized relations at a successor and a double successor from wondrous ideals. We show, however, that there are no such ideals over two consecutive cardinals simultaneously.

math.LO

Possibilistic Logic over a Logic of Formal Inconsistency

In this article, we have introduced a new possibilistic logic on a logic of formal inconsistency with the aim of developing a possibility theoretic framework to deal with uncertainty and inconsistency meaningfully without leading to a system collapse. We have discussed the syntax and semantics for this logic and have proved the soundness and completeness theorems. A set of new measures of consistency, contradictoriness, and triviality of a set of formulas have been defined. These have then been put to use in an example to show that this framework can provide better means of machine reasoning.

math.LO