sci.logic

Thread Index

Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Primitive Recursion and Computability
- From: Ugo Dal Lago
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
How Dave Touretzky censored my website
- From: Barbara Schwarz
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
a very easy problem
- From: nonick
a very easy problem
- From: d . chikhladze
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Can God make a hole so big he can't jump over it?
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: temporal logic Kt4
- From: galathaea
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Can God make a hole so big he can't jump over it?
- From: |-|erc
Re: temporal logic Kt4
- From: eimikion
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: all the good books are OOP
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: all the good books are OOP
- From: H. Enderton
Re: Another recursion theory / decidability question
- From: H. Enderton
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Another recursion theory / decidability question
- From: kevin
Re: Topology of proof
- From: Tom
Re: Recursive Well-ordering query.
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Recursive Well-ordering query.
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Recursive Well-ordering query.
- From: Daryl McCullough
Excluded Middle and Definiteness
- From: Daryl McCullough
Who first called the First Incompleteness Theorem the First Incompleteness Theorem?
- From: Peter_Smith
Recursive Well-ordering query.
- From: Bill Taylor
Re: temporal logic Kt4
- From: galathaea
Re: temporal logic Kt4
- From: galathaea
Re: all the good books are OOP
- From: James Dolan
temporal logic Kt4
- From: eimikion
Re: Topology of proof
- From: galathaea
Re: all the good books are OOP
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
all the good books are OOP
- From: Allan Adler
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Barb Knox
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Barb Knox
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: :: semantic realisation in constructivism ::
- From: galathaea
Cubic SAT solvers
- From: Shel L.
Re: :: semantic realisation in constructivism ::
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Kazimierz Kurz
Re: Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Moore's account of Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Moore on Skolem's Paradox
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Topology of proof
- From: Tom
Re: Topology of proof
- From: Tom
Re: Topology of proof
- From: galathaea
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Topology of proof
- From: galathaea
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C. Ullrich
Topology of proof
- From: Tom
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Goedel's undecidable G
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Goedel's undecidable G
- From: LordBeotian
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: George Dance
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
the nature of reality
- From: science dan
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: George Dance
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: george
Re: :: semantic realisation in constructivism ::
- From: Torkel Franzen
:: semantic realisation in constructivism ::
- From: galathaea
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: George Dance
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: MoeBlee
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: The Infinite Calculus 2
- From: zaljohar
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Robert Low
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
Re: The Infinite Calculus 2
- From: zaljohar
The Infinite Calculus 2
- From: zaljohar
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Irving Copi - Symbolic Logic
- From: Rick Blum
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Weyl's quote on set theory
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Would you accept this arithmetic thesis?
- From: Nam Nguyen
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: a simple derivation
- From: George Dance
Re: a simple derivation
- From: George Dance
Probability Distribution Problem
- From: FJ
Re: Language semantics is metalanguage syntax?
- From: Barb Knox
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
language of model is metalanguage of theory?
- From: andrewspencers
Re: Language semantics is metalanguage syntax?
- From: andrewspencers
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Russell, the set
- From: Owen
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: a simple derivation
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: a simple derivation
- From: George Dance
Re: a simple derivation
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Re: Language semantics is metalanguage syntax?
- From: Barb Knox
Re: a simple derivation
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Language semantics is metalanguage syntax?
- From: andrewspencers
Re: Russell, the set
- From: Barb Knox
Russell, the set
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Would you accept this arithmetic thesis?
- From: Barb Knox
Would you accept this arithmetic thesis?
- From: Nam Nguyen
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: adamgolding
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Barb Knox
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Robert Low
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: a simple derivation
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: Weyl's quote on set theory
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Robert Low
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: a simple derivation
- From: Jim Spriggs
a simple derivation
- From: fractal97
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: david petry
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Barb Knox
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: adamgolding
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: david petry
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Non-standard models of ZF
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Non-standard models of ZF
- From: LordBeotian
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: slaterbh
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: adamgolding
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Updated unexpected hanging paradox bibliography
- From: george
Re: Axiomatic Proof Help
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Axiomatic Proof Help
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: George Dance
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Herman Jurjus
Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Bill Taylor
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William Elliot
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: slaterbh
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Acme Diagnostics
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: Torkel Franzen
Skolem's 'Paradox'
- From: William of Ockham
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Owen
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Owen
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: H. J. Sander Bruggink
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Owen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Lee Rudolph
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: Axoimatic Proof Help
- From: mitch
Re: Axiomatic Proof Help
- From: mitch
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Robert Low
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Robert Low
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: futurist
Re: LaTeX (not just) for Logicians
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: Torkel Franzen
A Brief Note on Notation - A More Systematic Approach
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: G . Frege
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: G . Frege
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: futurist
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: george
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: G . Frege
Re: Axiomatic Proof Help
- From: G . Frege
Re: unconventional A and E
- From: Jeffrey Ketland
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: jirka
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Robert Low
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Brief Note on Notation
- From: adamgolding
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: adamgolding
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: Axoimatic Proof Help
- From: Torkel Franzen
Axoimatic Proof Help
- From: mitch
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Basic Axioms
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: A Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
A Brief Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
A Note on Notation
- From: George Dance
Basic Axioms
- From: George Dance
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: :: inaccessibility via barb ::
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Robert Low
Re: There can be no objective justification for our beliefs.
- From: Peter_Smith
:: inaccessibility via barb ::
- From: galathaea
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Darko Aleksic
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: slaterbh
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: William Elliot
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: G . Frege
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: G . Frege
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: G . Frege
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: unconventional A and E
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Darko Aleksic
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: george
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C. Ullrich
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Owen
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: George Dance
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: George Dance
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: George Dance
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Darko Aleksic
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Owen
Re: "These statements are false"
- From: George Dance
Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: George Dance
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: George Dance
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Robert Low
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: slaterbh
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: Barb Knox
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: William Elliot
Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: William of Ockham
Re: unconventional A and E
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Michael De
Re: Nonfirstorderizability
- From: George Dance
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: George Dance
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: 1Z
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: 1Z
unconventional A and E
- From: Allan Adler
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Aatu Koskensilta
A proof for !(p^q) |- !p v !q
- From: Newbie
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Confused about Intuitionistic provability
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: futurist
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: *# algebraic constructivism #*
- From: Michael De
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: *# algebraic constructivism #*
- From: Torkel Franzen
*# algebraic constructivism #*
- From: galathaea
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: slaterbh
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Robert Low
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: G . Frege
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: G . Frege
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: G . Frege
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: Existence and presupposition
- From: george
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: george
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: george
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Michael De
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: gsax
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: george
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Jim Spriggs
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: William Elliot
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: Robert Low
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Neil W Rickert
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: george
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Acme Diagnostics
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: David C . Ullrich
Re: An instance of Russell's paradox?
- From: A.T.
Re: Anti-diagonalist page
- From: george
Anti-diagonalist page
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: William of Ockham
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: provably unprovable?
- From: Robert Low
provably unprovable?
- From: gsax
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Visit 'We the Thinking'
- From: nathanhawking
Visit 'We the Thinking'
- From: nathanhawking
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: george
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: george
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: george
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: The Ghost In The Machine
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: The Ghost In The Machine
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Paul Holbach
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: William Elliot
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: William Elliot
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: William of Ockham
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: david petry
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Owen
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
cancelling postings Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Robert Low
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Colin
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Robert J. Kolker
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Ken Quirici
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: 1Z
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Owen
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Robert J. Kolker
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Robert J. Kolker
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Owen
Re: Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: Peter_Smith
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Lee Rudolph
Proof of p ^ !q |- !(p v q)
- From: JBL
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: berry
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: 1Z
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: 1Z
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Herman Jurjus
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: berry
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Peter Webb
reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: William Elliot
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: Keith Ramsay
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: Ross A. Finlayson
Re: Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: The Ghost In The Machine
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: musil23
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: Barb Knox
A new definition to "Truth" !
- From: caesarjbsquitti
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: LordBeotian
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: david petry
Re: Constructive Math query.
- From: david petry
Cantor's Diagonal Argument
- From: William of Ockham
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: galathaea
Re: All students either go to a party or work, but not both - predicate logic?
- From: George Dance
Re: The logic troubles of Alan Sokal and Richard Dawkins (the "Sokal hoax")
- From: Colin
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Chris Menzel
Re: An instance of Russell's paradox?
- From: A.T.
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Lee Rudolph
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Daryl McCullough
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: adamgolding
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: adamgolding
Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum
- From: adamgolding
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: galathaea
Re: Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Torkel Franzen
Humanistic mathematics: response to David Petry
- From: Bill Taylor
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: galathaea
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: Torkel Franzen
Re: All students either go to a party or work, but not both - predicate logic?
- From: David
Re: All students either go to a party or work, but not both - predicate logic?
- From: poopdeville
Re: An instance of Russell's paradox?
- From: Barb Knox
Re: All students either go to a party or work, but not both - predicate logic?
- From: William Elliot
All students either go to a party or work, but not both - predicate logic?
- From: David
[FAQ, 99/07/28] Mathematical logic on the web
- From: Boris 'pi' Piwinger
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: george
Re: Non-standard models of PA
- From: george
Re: An instance of Russell's paradox?
- From: george
Re: .999... = 1
- From: MoeBlee
Re: Confused about Intuitionistic provability
- From: Alan Smaill
Re: ?? truth as provability ??
- From: galathaea