Re: A implies I


David C. Ullrich wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 11:54:08 -0700, "William of Ockham"
<d3uckner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


David C. Ullrich wrote:

Regardless of what traditional logicians thought, _if_ we're
giving all the little words their presently _standard_ meanings
then yes, both these statements certainly _can_ be true. For
example when nothing is A.

What do you mean by standard meaning? Do you mean, the meaning we
learn by learning ordinary English?

What a silly question.

There's nothing silly about the first question. You obviously mean
something other than the dictionary definitions of the words; so what
is it?


Then 'every A is B' and 'no A is
B', as 'every' and 'no' are commonly understood, they cannot both be
true.


************************

David C. Ullrich

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: directional derivative,--
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... if it is indeed standard to consider only entire lines through ... This example shows that zero local slope is not in contradiction to positive average slope. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Choice Question # 2
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote & Charlie-Boo wrote: ... I was of that presentation of AC in the language of ZF. ... evidently meaning to say something about me. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: axioms of mathematical logic
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... very first bit of formalism in the exposition, ... inventions have meaning for anyone else. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: axioms of mathematical logic
    ... David C. Ullrich wrote: ... inventions have meaning for anyone else. ... ignorant of some standard conventions (the meaning of which should ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Descriptions, Presuppositions, Liar,...
    ... No, most people, in particular anyone dealing with standard ... So a logic of presuppositions IS conceivable after all. ... David C. Ullrich ...
    (sci.logic)
Loading