Message-ID:

It is not every question that deserves an answer. -- Publilius Syrus

tech / sci.logic / 2021-09-27

2021-09-27

<f43fbeee-0ada-4e0c-bb1a-cc68555f2cc8n@googlegroups.com>

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=5777&group=sci.logic#5777

X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:34f:b0:423:f0b1:4868 with SMTP id r15-20020a05622a034f00b00423f0b14868mr434952qtw.3.1703459519720;
Sun, 24 Dec 2023 15:11:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:3389:b0:5d3:bf64:5e20 with SMTP id
fl9-20020a05690c338900b005d3bf645e20mr2739799ywb.9.1703459519262; Sun, 24 Dec
2023 15:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!border-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.logic
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 15:11:59 -0800 (PST)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=97.126.106.141; posting-account=WH2DoQoAAADZe3cdQWvJ9HKImeLRniYW
NNTP-Posting-Host: 97.126.106.141
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f43fbeee-0ada-4e0c-bb1a-cc68555f2cc8n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: 2021-09-27
From: ross.a.f...@gmail.com (Ross Finlayson)
Injection-Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2023 23:11:59 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 32

by: Ross Finlayson - Sun, 24 Dec 2023 23:11 UTC

I framed it as was "I don't need that" with "ah, no, you need not that".

I wouldn't tell you to stop forward inference,
but it's kind of the point of deductive inference.

Making a "reasonable" assumption assumes all the
corresponding "reasonable" assumptions, what enter
the definition of definition what satisfies usually closure
of conditions, that make for sound inference.

Having "the antecedent's false so principle of explosion"
is wrong instead of some usual "antecedent's false so no
principle of explosion". I.e. there's for Shaffer's laser for
Occam's razor to not introduce _non-fundamental_
objects, that Occam is not making any false inferences from
any false antecedents.

Otherwise saying "any contradiction's the negation of all
other stipulation" is mostly wrong-ish for only allowing the
inferences what result preserving all validities.

"The X is Y and Not Y" is not true when there is Not X.
It's "negation" isn't true either.

Logic is modal you see, and basically there's one real modality,
about time. (In truth.)