Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- From: G. Frege <nomail@invalid>
- Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:50:06 +0100
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 15:54:20 +0100, G. Frege <nomail@invalid> wrote:
Sorry, some typos. Corrected.
>>>
>>> (A -> B) -> ((A -> ~B) -> ~A)
>>>
> Corresponds to a certain form of ~I (or "RAA"):
> ^^^
> [A] [A]
> : :
> B ~B
> : :
> ~B B
> : :
> --- ---
> ~A ~A
>
> (Note that in Gentzen's original systems of ND there are t w o rules
> ~I and ~E to the same effect.)
> ^^^ ^^^
>
F.
--
"I do tend to feel Hughes & Cresswell is a more authoritative
source than you." (D. Ullrich)
.
- References:
- Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- From: William Elliot
- Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- From: G . Frege
- Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- From: William Elliot
- Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- From: G . Frege
- Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- Prev by Date: Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- Next by Date: Re: What is the 1st order formal system known as PA?
- Previous by thread: Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- Next by thread: Re: Are Logicians Naturally Logical?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|