Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Michael Press <rubrum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:51:22 -0800
In article
<ucs8l3pl7s1omsaf7ra8chb85bj8c5rrkh@xxxxxxx>,
Angus Rodgers <twirlip@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But merely telling someone that they are
"proud" or "narcissistic", that they should either "stop talking"
or "have fun" (in a snide manner), or that they have "merely come
to argue", enlightens no-one,
In the context of this discussion, I am enlightened.
Very early I formed an opinion. Now someone has
taken you up on your mathematics, discussed it
with you, attempted to lead you to do mathematics,
and eventually formed a well-founded assessment.
This assessment is completely independent of the
opinion that I formed, and entirely consistent
with it.
--
Michael Press
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- References:
- The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: quasi
- Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- From: Angus Rodgers
- The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Prev by Date: Re: Non-zero gaps between real numbers
- Next by Date: Re: Is bijection valid for infinite sets?
- Previous by thread: Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Next by thread: Re: The Law of the Excluded Middle again (long)
- Index(es):