Re: "Friendly Premises"
- From: "Acme Diagnostics" <LFinezapthis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jul 2005 16:28:03 -0500
Torkel Franzen <torkel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>"Acme Diagnostics" <LFinezapthis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> There is no concept of "self-proving procedure" or "recursive
>>>proof" in logic.
>>
>> That statement is incorrect.
>
> OK, so you've invented them.
I invented nothing. You said, "There is no concept of
'self-proving procedure' or 'recursive proof' in logic." I
replied, "That statement is incorrect."
That's what is known as a call, i.e. I clearly called your
attention to a statement which I claim to contain a logic error.
You've had all the time you needed to review it.
The correct response was either 1) No, my statement is
correct, or 2) Yes, I made a logic error."
The response "Ok, so you've invented them" is an incorrect
response. It is plainly a weasel response. It says nothing.
Why should I now give you another time slice to correct this
second logic mistake? But ok. Go ahead. You probably are
totally oblivious to the fact that we're conducting logic here
anyway. No equal signs. Ok, special allowance for lightweight
beginners. Take all the time you need. Again.
>What I'm wondering is, what do you
>take them to mean?
Yeah, I'd want to change the subject too. Lots of names for that.
1 or 2, Torkel.
I bet I've pointed out 10 of your logic errors, and certainly at
least 5, yet you have not acknowledged even one of them. I'm
through wasting my good time trying to teach you logic without
any cooperation whatsoever from you.
Larry
p.s. Hope I didn't overdo it! Hehe. Me? Never!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "Friendly Premises"
- From: ram
- Re: "Friendly Premises"
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: "Friendly Premises"
- References:
- Re: "Friendly Premises"
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Prev by Date: Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Next by Date: Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Previous by thread: Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Next by thread: Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|