Re: An argument against modus ponens

george wrote:
On Sep 6, 9:16 pm, John Jones <jonescard...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Both ways are NOT equivalent. "P" announces P. If P ..." announces P and
another object.

You have mis-identified the ways. We were talking about "If P" in
BOTH cases.
There are two DIFFERENT ways of thinking of "If P". One of them is
static. The other is sequential (with time) and involves a change in
context,
involves 1 context BEFORE you say "P", and ANOTHER AFTER you say "P".

This is obvious yes?

It is obvious that If and P are different and mean different things,
yes.
But you don't have to say "If P" to "announce" the 2nd thing.
Obviously, "If" ANNOUNCES "If" and P then ANNOUNCES P.
But for you to even introduce this whole new concept of "announcing"
JUST PROVES YOU'RE STUPID.

I announce, you pronounce. Let us pronounce then that "if P" pronounces P and R.

NOTHING ever gets or NEEDS to get "announced"
EXCEPT VIA THE *DICTIONARY*!
Things get "announced" by way OF INTRODUCTION,
BEFORE
they ever get used!!

That's right 'if p' announces P and R.
.