| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<v0t0n4$32utt$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> Newsgroups: sci.logic Subject: Re: Undecidability based on epistemological antinomies Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 12:06:44 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 49 Message-ID: <v0t0n4$32utt$1@dont-email.me> References: <uvq0sg$21m7a$1@dont-email.me> <uvrbvs$2acf7$1@dont-email.me> <uvs70t$1h01f$1@i2pn2.org> <uvsgcl$2i80k$1@dont-email.me> <uvsj4v$1h01e$1@i2pn2.org> <uvubo2$34nh3$1@dont-email.me> <uvvsap$3i5q8$1@dont-email.me> <v00mf6$3nu0r$1@dont-email.me> <v02gu5$6quf$1@dont-email.me> <v038om$bitp$2@dont-email.me> <v05b0k$sivu$1@dont-email.me> <v05r5e$vvml$2@dont-email.me> <v05vl4$1165d$1@dont-email.me> <v0679k$12sq2$1@dont-email.me> <v07r2j$1h57l$1@dont-email.me> <v08gn4$1lpta$2@dont-email.me> <v0ag7u$27jkb$1@dont-email.me> <v0b8np$2d4ja$1@dont-email.me> <v0d372$2t7ec$1@dont-email.me> <v0do5i$31mkn$1@dont-email.me> <v0frdr$3jhng$1@dont-email.me> <v0gka2$3pm6f$1@dont-email.me> <v0idnn$91b6$1@dont-email.me> <v0ivqh$d40l$1@dont-email.me> <v0l3a0$vanr$1@dont-email.me> <v0lin5$12ip9$1@dont-email.me> <v0np15$1llt9$1@dont-email.me> <v0ob1e$1pbn5$7@dont-email.me> <v0ocuq$1qcqi$1@dont-email.me> <v0odv3$1qgpk$1@dont-email.me> <v0qmi5$2eont$1@dont-email.me> <v0r4tg$2hb7o$8@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 11:06:44 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1716a2484f3404323a54eaba3d323e93"; logging-data="3242941"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/NmxlSpinvIePEkwYA/usz" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:989KckQtZKC2aYu5Un9NQZ+a41k= Bytes: 3364 On 2024-04-30 16:06:08 +0000, olcott said: > On 4/30/2024 7:01 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-04-29 15:22:11 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 4/29/2024 10:04 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>> On 2024-04-29 14:32:13 +0000, olcott said: >>>> >>>>> On 4/29/2024 4:24 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-04-28 13:24:52 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Translated into a syllogism: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All A are True >>>>>>> No A are True >>>>>>> Therefore B >>>>>> >>>>>> Which inference rule of syllogistic logic permits that inference? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> (1) That is a correct translation from this POE argument: >>>>> Proposition A is True. >>>>> Proposition A is False. >>>>> Therefore B >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion >>>>> >>>>> (2) That as a syllogism it is the non-sequitur error proves >>>>> that the POE was the non-sequitur error all along. >>>> >>>> What you call a "syllogism" isn't one as it has none of the forms >>>> of valid syllogism as listed by Aristotle. >>>> >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_proposition >> >> That page does not tell what a syllogism is. Instead, the page >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism >> does. >> > > This is the part of the page on syllogism that links to that link > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism#Basic_structure THat's right. That section says what the form of a syllogism is. Your "syllogism" has not that form. -- Mikko