everything is a difference
From: patty (pattyNO_at_SPAMicyberspace.net)
Date: 07/14/04
- Next message: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Futility of Arguing with Bricks; was: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: doubting contradiction"
- Next in thread: Poker Joker: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Poker Joker: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: William Elliot: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Will Twentyman: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 19:45:49 GMT
Proof:
(1) Let P be stand for the class of things called "differences". Define
differences in the usual manner.
(2) P is the universal class if everything is a member of P.
(3) Postulate a class Q, such that the members of Q are different from
differences.
(4) But to be "different from a difference" is a difference.
(5) Consequently the members of Q are differences and hence members of P.
(6) Therefore according to (2) & (5) everything is a difference.
Can you spot the error in this proof?
patty
- Next message: David C. Ullrich: "Re: The Futility of Arguing with Bricks; was: The Psychology of Responding to Crackpots"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: doubting contradiction"
- Next in thread: Poker Joker: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Poker Joker: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: William Elliot: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Will Twentyman: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Reply: Eray Ozkural exa: "Re: everything is a difference"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|