Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z

From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 03/24/05 

Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:55:53 -0500

Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> Yes, duh. Except I still do not care for this term "sound premises".
>
> Premises are formulas. Formulas are either true or false. Soundness
> adds nothing useful to the discussion.

What about non closed wffs. There are formulas with free variables that
are not true in every model.

Bob Kolker

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z
    ... It is more common to simply define proofs so that premises ... >> and the goal are closed wffs. ... But surely if the theory is consistent, there is a model and if there ... > of soundness. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z
    ... kolker" writes: ... Soundness ... > What about non closed wffs. ... It is more common to simply define proofs so that premises ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Models and consistency
    ... Soundness entails consistency but not ... but on the TRUTH of the PREMISES. ... a "false theorem" UNLESS you PRIORLY had a false axiom. ... then the whole question of whether it even has axioms at all becomes ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Distinct linear orderings on Z
    ... Jesse F. Hughes said: ... > That is not the technical definition of soundness. ...
    (sci.math)
Quantcast