[hosepipe]

#553.. [ As for Niels Bohr, I haven't read much of the man's work, but along with Alamo-Girl I endorse his "cut." I would only add that the cut, cuts both ways. ]

So if I get your drift.. and I think that I do...
2 + 2 = 4 and if you come up with either 5 or 3 you are equally WRONG.. and any convoluted iterations of the error will be not any more WRONG than you started out.. or did I miss something.?.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your engaging post!

So if I get your drift.. and I think that I do... 2 + 2 = 4 and if you come up with either 5 or 3 you are equally WRONG.. and any convoluted iterations of the error will be not any more WRONG than you started out.. or did I miss something.?

My understanding of Bohr's cut is that "2+2=4" is all that science and math can say about the subject of 2+2 in base 10. A contrary assertion that "2+2=5" would be false.

But Bohr would not say why "2+2=4 in base 10" should exist at all or what it means in the lofty structure of all that there is. That, he would suggest, is the domain of philosophy/theology.

betty boop: is this your understanding of how Bohr's cut would apply to hosepipe's example?

[Bouilhet]

2 + 2 = 4 and if you come up with either 5 or 3 you are equally WRONG.. and any convoluted iterations of the error will be not any more WRONG than you started out.

Yes. And I agree with Alamo-Girl that there is no why to be drawn from this. Truth, here, is simply any statement which adheres to the logic of the system. That is, 2+2=4 adheres to the logic and is therefore true; 2+2=5 does not, and therefore constitutes a false statement.