1. It is quite straightforward to see that what G says is true.

Indeed, as we
observed earlier, G says: There is no PM demonstration of G. (At least
this is the meta-mathematical interpretation of G; when read at the
number-theoretical level, G merely says that there is no number x that
bears a certain relationshipnamely, the dem relationshipto the
number sub (n, 17, n).
2. To convince ourselves that G is true, it suffices to consider only the
former interpretation.) But we have just shown that G is undecidable
within PM, so in particular G has no proof inside PM. But that, recall, is
just what G asserts! So G asserts the truth. The reader should carefully
note that we have established a number-theoretical truth not by
deducing it formally from the axioms and rules of a formal system, but
by a meta-mathematical argument.