## Search found 3907 matches

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:41 pm
- Forum: Epistemology - Theory of Knowledge
- Topic: The Contradiction of the Three Laws of Logic
- Replies:
**150** - Views:
**10527**

### Re: The Contradiction of the Three Laws of Logic

Intuition = logic. Intuition is the opposite of logic. See M&W. What's incompatible between a "swift" process and a logical conclusion? Intuition is swift. Intuition is the opposite of logic. How could you possibly know that logic is not involved in all our intuitive decisions? Logic is the opposit...

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 4:27 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

IT DOES NOT FAIL TO TAKE THE ARROW OF TIME INTO ACCOUNT. Default reasoning concludes the time is now unless otherwise specified. I have no idea what you mean by "now". Formalize it for me. Is it an instant or an interval? Is time an Integer or a Real ? None-the-less: ¬(True ↔ False) in all possible...

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:44 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

It's not a law. It's an axiom/proposition. It fails to take the arrow of time into account.

https://repl.it/repls/BoringRedundantFormulas

Code: Select all

```
p and ( not p )
=> true
```

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:42 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Religion
- Topic: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?
- Replies:
**255** - Views:
**1950**

### Re: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?

According to which logic exactly? There are so many to choose from.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 3:26 pmIt's logically inescapable, actually. But I see we're just disagreeing about that.

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:37 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

You do know that "consistency" itself is an arbitrary choice/property for any data system, right?PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:29 pmAll of conceptual truth functions this way as long as it remains consistent.

Inconsistency forces a choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAP_theorem

- Wed Apr 24, 2019 2:15 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Religion
- Topic: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?
- Replies:
**255** - Views:
**1950**

### Re: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?

The same thing happens when you make the claim that "God is an uncaused cause". The universe is a caused cause. The universe is indeed a caused cause. But that's why it cannot be the answer to its own origin. It requires a cause. Deflection. Both God and Universe are causes. The distinction between...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:32 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)
- Replies:
**77** - Views:
**559**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)

False dichotomy,PeteOlcott wrote: ↑Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:59 pmhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_overload

Not at all. Ambiguity is not more expressive than the absence of ambiguity.

Every term is uniquely qualified to specify only a single semantic meaning.

Saying something ambiguous is more expressive than saying nothing at all.

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 6:20 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Religion
- Topic: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?
- Replies:
**255** - Views:
**1950**

### Re: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?

The probability of any particular phenomenon EXISTING... You're still thinking God is a "phenomenon," and as such, is governed by "probabilities" -- as if chance is a kind of comprehensive force, governing even God. Probability calculations only apply to contingent entities, and only those in which...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:11 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)
- Replies:
**77** - Views:
**559**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)

I closed the expressiveness gap of formal proofs to theorem consequences of symbolic logic by converting these formal proofs to conform to the sound deductive inference model. You are attempting to remove semantic overloading from formal systems. That's the exact opposite of closing a gap. You are ...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:06 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

I closed the expressiveness gap of formal proofs to theorem consequences of symbolic logic by converting these formal proofs to conform to the sound deductive inference model. In my personal experience rules hinder expressiveness, but lets skip that for a second. In what way is the deductive infere...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:43 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipulative_definition A stipulative definition is a type of definition in which a new or currently-existing term is given a new specific meaning for the purposes of argument or discussion in a given context. I am stipulating: T ⇔ True ⊥ ⇔ False I am also stipulating t...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:32 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)
- Replies:
**77** - Views:
**559**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)

Your meaning is NOT the subject that I am discussing. It is off topic. The topic is transforming formal proof into sound deduction. Please stay on topic. Pete, you are re-inventing the Curry-Howard isomorphism. Stanford has been paying you a salary for 22 years. Is there a point at which you contri...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:07 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)
- Replies:
**77** - Views:
**559**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (rewritten)

I already corrected your incorrect decoding once I mean [is_a_type_of] I still mean [is_a_type_of]. I only used the less precise term initially to avoid giving you more information than you could handle. Pete, you clearly didn't hear me the first time when I said it. I am not the one DECODING meani...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:05 pm
- Forum: Logic and Philosophy of Mathematics
- Topic: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)
- Replies:
**28** - Views:
**244**

### Re: Transforming formal proof into sound deduction (greatly simplified)

Truth is the way that it is, one either gets this correctly or fails to. That is a rather interesting decision problem unfolding right before you. We have two hypothesis on the table: A. Pete Olcott correctly gets the way truth is. B. Pete Olcott fails to get the way truth is. In what formal system...

- Tue Apr 23, 2019 3:20 pm
- Forum: Philosophy of Religion
- Topic: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?
- Replies:
**255** - Views:
**1950**

### Re: Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?

God exists in some sense. Necessary existence, self-existence. The universe exists in another sense. Contingent existence, dependent existence. Thank you for making my point. This is the second time you are making me explain probability theory to you. The probability of any particular phenomenon ha...