Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: "George Dance" <georgedance04@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 16 Aug 2005 09:13:32 -0700
Keith Ramsay wrote:
> George Dance wrote:
> |george wrote:
> |> > > Some relative of each villager and some relative
> |> > > of each townsman hate each other.
> |>
> |> How about
> |> Axy[ Vx&Ty -> Euv[ Rxu & Ryv & Huv & Hvu ] ]
> |
> |How does that differ from what you snipped:
> | AxAyEzEu((Vx -> Rzx) & (Ty -> Ruy) & (Hzu & Huz))
> |?
>
> Suppose there are no villagers or townsmen. Then the
> first version is true, while the second version still
> requires that (if there is anyone) there exists either
> one person z=u who hates himself or two people z<>u
> who hate each other.
I was hoping that george would answer the question, but...
That is a difference: On george's 'boolean' interpretation, "Some
relative of each villager and some relative of each townsman hate each
other" does not imply that "Some people hate each other": it would be
illogical to infer, from someone's asserting the first statement, that
he is also asserting the second.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: george
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- References:
- Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Michael De
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Michael De
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Michael De
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: george
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
- Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Nonfirstorderizability
- Prev by Date: Re: "Friendly Premises"
- Next by Date: Re: Online Study Group for Gensler's Logic
- Previous by thread: Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- Next by thread: Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|