Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox
From: G. Frege (no_spam_at_aol.com)
Date: 06/03/04
- Next message: Yarden Katz: "3 basic metalogic questions."
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Re: resolving Will's misunderstanding"
- In reply to: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Next in thread: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Reply: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 00:30:09 +0200
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 19:03:40 GMT, "Witt" <oorionus@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> In free logic
>>
> What do you mean by 'free logic'?
>
Oh come on, Witt! :-( (free logic --> /Free Logic/)
>>>
>>> E!b <-> EF((F)b) (*)
>>>
Well, how about F = (~E!)?
Assume we have
(~E!)b.
Then we get
EF(Fb).
And hence from your (*)
E!b.
With other words:
(~E!)b -> E!b.
"If b is nonexistent it exists."
Well...
F.
- Next message: Yarden Katz: "3 basic metalogic questions."
- Previous message: |-|erc: "Re: resolving Will's misunderstanding"
- In reply to: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Next in thread: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Reply: Witt: "Re: Refutation of Bertrand Russell's Barber Paradox"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
