Do you believe that formal languages are comparable to natural languages in this respect?

Formal languages are based on axiomatic truths, and they restrict their functionality to describing the relationships of symbols.

They're not based on empirical observations, and they're not dependent on biophysical sensation or on non-axiomatic presumptions.

I don't see any equivalence in this comparison.

(Nice try, though...)

Thanks again for participating. I appreciate our conversation. May we continue?

My experience is in psych and philosophy; yours is mathematics.

What are the consequences of insisting that anyone who disagrees with my belief is absolutely mistaken?

And what would be the consequences of giving up insisting that our inferential beliefs are absolutely true?

Why do people isn't that their beliefs must be true?

Do you have any interest in our motives, Hive account@axiogenesis? Do you examine yours?

[wondering]