"Mathematics is different"

Well, that's my point, isn't it?

"reduce truth to a function of language"

Reduce? Is it an abstract ideal or isn't it? Correspondence is a myth, right?

"consistency is all we can expect from any discipline. Mathematics is a counterexample. The view that truth is always a function of language shatters on Gödel's work."

Isn't this like conflating elephants and quarks?

Truth is either given and preserved, or it's not. In math and logic it is, otherwise it's not.

Derivation and inference are completely different animals.

Is this mistaken? Is it confusing? It's not very complicated, is it?

Where's the absolute truth in any of this?

IMO:
It's just an idea; it applies where it applies and it doesn't apply to science. Math: yes; science: no.

Casual conversation: No

Thanks again for discussing this, axiogenesis.

If you presume and insist that you know the truth, then you must believe that your ideas are superior to mine, because I don't claim to know the truth about the various inferences that I make.

That's how you win, by insisting that you know better, whether what you know makes sense to someone else or not.

So, you've beaten me with your presumption, which (I suppose that) you suppose is superior to mine.

Ouch.