>
>For what Tarski says to be true -I guess this must be some meta use of
>"true" lol---there must be added something like "in English"
>but this seems to make Tarski's theory rather uninformative about truth in
>general and also make truth a predicate of sentences in specific languages.
Yeah, I didn't want to get too technical, and start explaining Davidsonian semantics of natural languages to people who aren't interested.
>Tarski notes his own indebtedness to Aristotle and regards his semantic
>theory as a modern reconstruction of what is right in Aristotle. Aristotle
>said that it is true to say of what is that it is and of what it is not
>that
>it is not. This seems to be a much better formulation than anything Tarski
>ever did.
Hunmph. Though I like Ari's formulation.
--jks
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp