Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin
From: Jussi Piitulainen (jpiitula_at_ling.helsinki.fi)
Date: 09/08/04
- Next message: Alfred Einstead: "Re: Speculative, but at least interesting"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- In reply to: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Next in thread: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Reply: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Reply: Robin Chapman: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 08 Sep 2004 15:19:27 +0300
Jesse F. Hughes writes:
> Robin Chapman writes:
>> No, you denied it; you did not refute it.
>
> Unfortunately for those of us with backgrounds in math and logic, a
> common meaning of "refute" is a synonym for "deny".
[...]
> It's not a usage I like, but it's common enough to be in some
> dictionaries. I don't know if it's just an Americanism.
A modern British dictionary, Collins Cobuild, lists it. It marks both
uses (disprove and deny) as "formal" but not limited to any region.
- Next message: Alfred Einstead: "Re: Speculative, but at least interesting"
- Previous message: Mitch Harris: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- In reply to: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Next in thread: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Reply: Jesse F. Hughes: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Reply: Robin Chapman: "Re: Raatikainen's critique of Chaitin"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|