Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: herbzet <herbzet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 21:12:57 -0500
"Nam D. Nguyen" wrote:
herbzet wrote:
"Nam D. Nguyen" wrote:
Daryl McCullough wrote:
Nam D. Nguyen says...Sure. If 1 + 1 = 0 then " 1 + 1 = 0" is true; and if
Daryl McCullough wrote:If snow is white, then "Snow is white" is true.
If you've seen white snow, then you know what "Snow is white"What then, in the name of logic, is to be true?
means, and so you know what it means for "Snow is white" to be
true. If you've seen non-white snow, then you know what
"Snow is not white" means, and so you know what it means for
"Snow is not white" to be true. I don't understand what is
troubling you about this.
If snow is not white, then "Snow is white" is not true.
1 + 1 != 0 then " 1 + 1 = 0" is not true!
Still, what, in the name of logic, is to be true, without
the *if*?
It seems to me that you're interested in logical truth,
i.e., analytic truth, whereas these guys seem to be discussing
the antecedent and subsidiary question of synthetic truth.
Is "1 + 1 = 2" an analytic or synthetic truth?
I don't know.
The point I'm trying to make is that all truths are relative.
1) Relative to what?
2) Is "All truths are relative" a relative truth?
In fact, to date, I've not found any mathematical proposition,
however true or false, that one can't go to the meta level
and reverse its truth value! Unless of course I've missed that
proposition by knowledge. But in which case, I'd appreciate
the proposition be stated.
Not sure what you're talking about. Is
(1 + 1 = 0) v ~(1 + 1 = 0)
a mathematical proposition? (Or "just" a logical proposition?)
Is its truth relative to something? What is the meta-level on
which its truth-value is different?
Yours truly,
hz
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- References:
- OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: LauLuna
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: abo
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: herbzet
- Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- From: Nam D. Nguyen
- OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- Prev by Date: Re: The set of all JOKES.....
- Next by Date: Re: Inconsistent = all sentences provable?
- Previous by thread: Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- Next by thread: Re: OUTGOEDELING A HUMAN?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|