{ "export": { "source": "https://urth.darkrealm.vip/thread/urth/6687", "note": "Exported from an unofficial mirror of a public mailing list. Copyright in each message remains with the person who wrote it. Email addresses are obscured as `user at host`, the form the original archive published. This file was rebuilt from parsed fields rather than retained headers, so it is faithful in content but not byte-exact.", "addresses": "obscured as 'user at host'" }, "archive": "urth", "thread": { "id": 6687, "subject": "I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "messages": 18, "voices": 8, "first": "2014-10-15T18:28:37+00:00", "last": "2014-10-17T16:12:27+00:00" }, "messages": [ { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013291@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-15T18:28:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": null, "reply_link": null, "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I notice that none of the \"we can never know anything absolutely\" team on this thread has accepted my challenge to explain how A can be true, and A implies B can be true, and yet B can be false. I think maybe everything that can be said on this subject has been said. I think maybe I'll go home and read a story by Gene Wolfe.\n\nRick Norwood" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Brendon Fuhs", "address": "brendon.fuhs at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-15T19:10:39+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013291@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Here is my attempt.\n\nSuppose we are in a universe in which any statement implied by a true\nstatement is considered false. Thus, if \"A is True\" and \"A => B\", then \"B\nis False\". But if we are in such a universe, and the fact that we are in\nsuch a universe implies the relationships we have described between A and\nB, then by the nature of implication in that universe, those relationships\ncan't possibly be true. As it happens, we don't live in such a universe.\nTherefore the statement \"if A is True and A => B, then B is False\" is\nperfectly consistent! ;)\n\nI declare this to be Gene Wolfe related because Wolfe likes to use apparent\nparadoxes and deliberately slippery logic in his worldbuilding." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\nI notice that none of the \"we can never know anything absolutely\" team on\nthis thread has accepted my challenge to explain how A can be true, and A\nimplies B can be true, and yet B can be false. I think maybe everything\nthat can be said on this subject has been said. I think maybe I'll go home\nand read a story by Gene Wolfe.\n\nRick Norwood\n_______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<543F4C03.6040006@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-16T04:39:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013291@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/15/2014 1:28 PM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nI notice that none of the \"we can never know anything absolutely\"\nteam on this thread has accepted my challenge to explain how A can be\ntrue, and A implies B can be true, and yet B can be false." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That is known as modus ponens (the method that affirms), but that's \nshort for modus ponendo ponens (the method that affirms by affirming), \nand as the longer Latin name implies, its truth is complicated by an \ninfinite regress, as dramatized by another famed fantasy author:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Tortoise_Said_to_Achilles\n\nIf you consider a true statement about abstracted symbols to be an \nabsolute truth, why not save steps and just say \"A is A\"? That remains \nvalid regardless of the values of A or B or the validity of modus ponens." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013391@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-16T12:07:32+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<543F4C03.6040006@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeffery Wilson: I do say A is A. That's called the reflexive property of equality. And, yes, I've read the Lewis Carroll bit. Even wrote a poem about it.\n\nSaid the mathematician Kurt Godel,\nThere are obstacles we'll never hurdle,\nThere's a theorem that's true\nBut no proof can you do,\n'Till Achilles outraces the turtle.\n\nModern mathematics has dealt with the paradox. See, for example, Logic for Mathematicians by Hamilton.\n\nBrendon Fuhs: Sure, you can say any consequence of a true statement is false, but I think you've just changed the meaning of the word \"true\", not invented a new logic.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 12:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/15/2014 1:28 PM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nI notice that none of the \"we can never know anything absolutely\"\nteam on this thread has accepted my challenge to explain how A can be \ntrue, and A implies B can be true, and yet B can be false." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "That is known as modus ponens (the method that affirms), but that's short for modus ponendo ponens (the method that affirms by affirming), and as the longer Latin name implies, its truth is complicated by an infinite regress, as dramatized by another famed fantasy author:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Tortoise_Said_to_Achilles\n\nIf you consider a true statement about abstracted symbols to be an absolute truth, why not save steps and just say \"A is A\"? That remains valid regardless of the values of A or B or the validity of modus ponens." }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab < http://www.tamut.edu/cil > _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "<5440AF56.4020005@clueland.com>", "from": { "name": "Jeffery Wilson clueland.com", "address": "jwilson at clueland.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T05:55:34+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013391@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/16/2014 7:07 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nJeffery Wilson: I do say A is A. That's called the reflexive property of equality. And, yes, I've read the Lewis Carroll bit. Even wrote a poem about it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you already know that the modus ponens is unprovable, and are \nfamiliar with reflexive equality which is axiomatic, why are you \nbothering to hold up modus ponens as an example of an absolute truth?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab\n< http://www.tamut.edu/cil >" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D01365E@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-17T13:23:17+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<5440AF56.4020005@clueland.com>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Modus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/16/2014 7:07 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nJeffery Wilson: I do say A is A. That's called the reflexive property of equality. And, yes, I've read the Lewis Carroll bit. Even wrote a poem about it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you already know that the modus ponens is unprovable, and are familiar with reflexive equality which is axiomatic, why are you bothering to hold up modus ponens as an example of an absolute truth?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab < http://www.tamut.edu/cil > _______________________________________________" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T13:40:12+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D01365E@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "These are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much\nelse.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live\nwithout a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean\nanything." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible\nthat modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman,\nand modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only\ncreature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art\nGod.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and\nafter a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus\nponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to\nbuild. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is\nfalse, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true\nand false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery\nWilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<4B21FB02-6DCB-4DB7-A931-4C3C3FCD3FDC@gmail.com>", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T13:46:37+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D01365E@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "No dia 17/10/2014, ?s 14:23, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Even merely human communication and language are not chained to what logic is able to dream of." } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D0136BB@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-17T14:03:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Ant?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to be chained by logic.\n\nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is built on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply modus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is divisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd. Then the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Marc Aramini\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much else.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean anything.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/16/2014 7:07 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nJeffery Wilson: I do say A is A. That's called the reflexive property of equality. And, yes, I've read the Lewis Carroll bit. Even wrote a poem about it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you already know that the modus ponens is unprovable, and are familiar with reflexive equality which is axiomatic, why are you bothering to hold up modus ponens as an example of an absolute truth?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab < http://www.tamut.edu/cil > _______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T14:19:31+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D0136BB@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "yes, if it becomes false, you don't apply it. Thus, there is no case where\nmodus ponens can ever be misapplied, and your original challenge one which\ncannot be met. If A, then B ... I'm going to stick to talking about Wolfe." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n Ant?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to\nbe chained by logic.\n\n\n\nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is\nbuilt on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply\nmodus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is\ndivisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd.\nThen the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Marc\nAramini\n*Sent:* Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\n\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the\ngreat...\n\n\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\n\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\n\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much\nelse.\n\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live\nwithout a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean\nanything.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible\nthat modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman,\nand modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only\ncreature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art\nGod.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and\nafter a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus\nponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to\nbuild. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is\nfalse, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true\nand false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery\nWilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T14:34:09+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D0136BB@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you thought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can go around calling others names.\n\nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Ant?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to be chained by logic.\n \nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is built on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply modus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is divisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd. Then the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n \nRick Norwood\n \nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Marc Aramini\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n \nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much else.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean anything.\n \nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013B4F@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-17T14:38:40+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I did not mean to be calling you names. You said you did not want to be chained to logic; that sounds like post-modernism to me. I apologize if you think of post-modernism differently.\n\nYes, I have formal training in mathematics.\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Pedro Marques\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 10:34 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n\nI'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you thought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can go around calling others names.\n\nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" > escreveu:\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to be chained by logic.\n\nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is built on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply modus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is divisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd. Then the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Marc Aramini\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much else.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean anything.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson > wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On 10/16/2014 7:07 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nJeffery Wilson: I do say A is A. That's called the reflexive property of equality. And, yes, I've read the Lewis Carroll bit. Even wrote a poem about it." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you already know that the modus ponens is unprovable, and are familiar with reflexive equality which is axiomatic, why are you bothering to hold up modus ponens as an example of an absolute truth?" }, { "kind": "sig", "depth": 0, "text": "Jeff Wilson - < jwilson at clueland.com >\nA&M Texarkana Computational Intelligence Lab < http://www.tamut.edu/cil > _______________________________________________\nUrth Mailing List\nTo post, write urth at urth.net\nSubscription/information: http://www.urth.net" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes", "address": "danldo at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T15:24:42+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013B4F@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "All Greeks are men.\nSocrates is a Greek.\nTherefore, I like pizza." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n I did not mean to be calling you names. You said you did not want to be\nchained to logic; that sounds like post-modernism to me. I apologize if\nyou think of post-modernism differently.\n\n\n\nYes, I have formal training in mathematics.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] *On Behalf Of *Ant?nio\nPedro Marques\n*Sent:* Friday, October 17, 2014 10:34 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the\ngreat...\n\n\n\nI'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you\nthought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can\ngo around calling others names.\n\n\n\nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n\n\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> escreveu:\n\n Ant?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to\nbe chained by logic.\n\n\n\nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is\nbuilt on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply\nmodus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is\ndivisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd.\nThen the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On Behalf Of *Marc Aramini\n*Sent:* Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the\ngreat...\n\n\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\n\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\n\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much\nelse.\n\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live\nwithout a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean\nanything.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu> wrote:\n\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible\nthat modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman,\nand modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only\ncreature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art\nGod.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and\nafter a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus\nponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to\nbuild. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is\nfalse, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true\nand false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery\nWilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Lee", "address": "severiansola at hotmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T15:26:19+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "subject", "blocks": [ { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Marc Aramini: These are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: Even merely human communication and language are not chained" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "to what logic is able to dream of." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am thinking of the Biblical passage in which \"a cherubim\" is set to guard the Garden of\n\nEden. An illogical linguistic construction, where a singular article is paired with a plural \n\nnoun, is used to describe an angelic being which does not fit into a logical framework of \n\nhuman comprehension yet still, apparently, is assumed to exist. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013BB3@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "from": { "name": "Norwood, Frederick Hudson", "address": "norwoodr at mail.etsu.edu" }, "date": "2014-10-17T16:04:33+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "Good one, Lee.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Lee" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 11:26 AM\nTo: urth at urth.net\nSubject: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\nMarc Aramini: These are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ..." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "Antonio Marques: Even merely human communication and language are not chained" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "to what logic is able to dream of." }, { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I am thinking of the Biblical passage in which \"a cherubim\" is set to guard the Garden of\n\nEden. An illogical linguistic construction, where a singular article is paired with a plural \n\nnoun, is used to describe an angelic being which does not fit into a logical framework of \n\nhuman comprehension yet still, apparently, is assumed to exist. \t\t \t \t\t " } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "Marc Aramini", "address": "marcaramini at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T16:07:43+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "If you liked pizza after Socrates was Greek , which seemed to be the case,\nthen it might be post hoc ergo propter hoc rather than a standard non\nsequitur.\n\n\nOn a wolfe related topic, I did use logic to think of my changeling\nreading: either the boy was 15 or 18 in Korea, and the changeless\ndoppelg?nger appeared at the same time as his three years older sister. So\nI knew his birthday was either 1934, creating military problems and one\nfamily split in twain in 1945, or 1931, solving two problems and positing\ntwo families. External references verified the 1931 date. Logic applies to\nWolfe, as does Chekov's gun." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday, October 17, 2014, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:\nAll Greeks are men.\nSocrates is a Greek.\nTherefore, I like pizza.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:38 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu\n> wrote:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": " I did not mean to be calling you names. You said you did not want to\nbe chained to logic; that sounds like post-modernism to me. I apologize if\nyou think of post-modernism differently.\n\n\n\nYes, I have formal training in mathematics.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On\nBehalf Of *Ant?nio Pedro Marques\n*Sent:* Friday, October 17, 2014 10:34 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the\ngreat...\n\n\n\nI'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you\nthought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can\ngo around calling others names.\n\n\n\nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n\n\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu\n> escreveu:\n\n Ant?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to\nbe chained by logic.\n\n\n\nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is\nbuilt on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply\nmodus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is\ndivisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd.\nThen the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\n\n\nRick Norwood\n\n\n\n*From:* Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] *On\nBehalf Of *Marc Aramini\n*Sent:* Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\n*To:* The Urth Mailing List\n*Subject:* Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the\ngreat...\n\n\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\n\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\n\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much\nelse.\n\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can\nlive without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't\nmean anything.\n\n\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson <\nNORWOODR at mail.etsu.edu\n> wrote:\n\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible\nthat modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman,\nand modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only\ncreature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art\nGod.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and\nafter a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus\nponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to\nbuild. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is\nfalse, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true\nand false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net\n] On Behalf\nOf Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "", "from": { "name": "António Pedro Marques", "address": "entonio at gmail.com" }, "date": "2014-10-17T16:11:16+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "<0DA454A32913114C9CC19BB781FB907D013B4F@ETSUMB2.etsu.edu>", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "I asked that because one has to know what one is dealing with. I do not enjoy having my position be misunderstood. Math-oriented folks usually like to be rigorous in their exchanges. I said absolutely nothing about wanting or not wanting to be chained to logic; this discussion is not about personal wishes.\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:38, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:" }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "I did not mean to be calling you names. You said you did not want to be chained to logic; that sounds like post-modernism to me. I apologize if you think of post-modernism differently.\n \nYes, I have formal training in mathematics.\n \nRick Norwood\n \nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Pedro Marques\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 10:34 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n \nI'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you thought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can go around calling others names.\n \nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n \n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:\n\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to be chained by logic.\n \nYou, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is built on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply modus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is divisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd. Then the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n \nRick Norwood\n \nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Marc Aramini\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n \nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ...\nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically\nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much else.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean anything.\n \nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all.\n\nRick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] }, { "message_id": "<1413562347.50240.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>", "from": { "name": "DAVID STOCKHOFF", "address": "dstockhoff at verizon.net" }, "date": "2014-10-17T16:12:27+00:00", "subject": "(urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...", "in_reply_to": "", "reply_link": "header", "blocks": [ { "kind": "text", "depth": 0, "text": "And if she doesn't like pizza . . . Python fans know the rest." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 1, "text": "On Friday, October 17, 2014 12:09 PM, Ant?nio Pedro Marques wrote:\n\n\nI asked that because one has to know what one is dealing with. I do not enjoy having my position be misunderstood. Math-oriented folks usually like to be rigorous in their exchanges. I said absolutely nothing about wanting or not wanting to be chained to logic; this discussion is not about personal wishes.\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:38, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:\n\n\nI did not mean to be calling you names. You said you did not want to be chained to logic; that sounds like post-modernism to me. I apologize if you think of post-modernism differently.\n\nYes, I have formal training in mathematics.\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom:Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Ant?nio Pedro Marques\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 10:34 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n\nI'm not anything of the sort. Just because the inadequacies of tools you thought all powerful are pointed out to you, it doesn't follow that you can go around calling others names.\n\nDo you have formal higher training in Math?\n\n\nNo dia 17/10/2014, ?s 15:03, \"Norwood, Frederick Hudson\" escreveu:\nAnt?nio Pedro Marques is at least unabashedly post-modern, refusing to be chained by logic." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 2, "text": "You, Marc Aramini, keep confusing logic with science. Mathematics is built on logic. If the premise becomes false, then you no longer apply modus ponens. You don’t need to lose your head. Every even number is divisible by two. What if the original premise is ?This number is odd. Then the theorem doesn’t apply. It doesn’t disprove modus ponens.\n\nRick Norwood\n\nFrom:Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Marc Aramini\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 9:40 AM\nTo: The Urth Mailing List\nSubject: Re: (urth) I, even I, would celebrate, in rhymes inept the great...\n\nThese are linguistic truths built into the definitions themselves ... \nthe statement if A then B is either true linguistically \nor it isn't, in which case the premise was wrong. It doesn't mean much else.\nie \"If I have no head I will die.\" technology advances, and now I can live without a head - the original premise then becomes false. Doesn't mean anything.\n\nOn Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Norwood, Frederick Hudson wrote:\nModus ponens is unprovable. You have to start somewhere. Is it possible that modus ponens is false? Of course it is possible. I may be a madman, and modus ponens may not say what I think it says. I may be the only creature in the universe, and modus ponens may really mean, \"Thou art God.\" But these objections can be raised in any discussion whatsoever, and after a while most people stop raising them. If I am sane, and if modus ponens says what I think it says, then it seems to me bedrock on which to build. Further, if there are cases where A implies B, A is true, and B is false, then that ends the discussion, because every statement is both true and false, and in that case there is no point in saying anything at all." }, { "kind": "quote", "depth": 3, "text": "Rick Norwood\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: Urth [mailto:urth-bounces at lists.urth.net] On Behalf Of Jeffery Wilson clueland.com\nSent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:56 AM" } ] } ] }