Re: reductio ad falsum versus reductio ad absurdum

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, futurist wrote:

> sorry about that--that was the first time i've used Google Groups'
> quick-reply feature, which i assumed would just quote the entire
> previous message. anyway, this was a reply to Torkel Franzen's
> distinction between contructive reductio and indirect proof. there is
> another post which is in response to you which has all the appropriate
> quotations in place.
>
Google quick-reply feature for math, science and serious discussion
sucks big time. Don't use it except for the frivolous of yack yack
newgoupies for which it's designed. Upon hearing Google was getting
greedy with public stock offering, I knew it was going to deteriorate.
Indeed and alas, my foreknowledge wasn't disappointed.

Use the include reply feature and trim out of it only that context that
has been resolved or nor longer pertinent to the continuation.
Related reading at http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm

I hadn't noticed any replies addressed to me.
Note, I read by new arrivals and not by thread.

BTW the way, using capital "I" would polish your posts
toward appearing studious and scholarly.
.

Relevant Pages