The death of Classical logic and the birth of Constructive Mathematics

[Logik]

Only in modern mathematical so-called "classical logic", something which is neither classical nor logic.
So, not in classical, Aristotelian logic, no. Apples are not oranges.

Great! Express is for us in logic then.

Express for us the abstract notion of apples.
The abstract notion of oranges.
Then compare them to each other to produce "False"

You would need to produce an example here to prove your claim, here.
EB

Your inability to express English into logic is all the evidence we need really.
Aristotelian logic is the LAWS OF THOUGHT. Great!

If Aristotelian logic is THE LAWS of thought then you should be able to translate ALL your English THOUGHTS into logic.
If you can't translate ALL your English into logic, then surely your words are not THOUGHT out?


God forbid you had to express anything dynamic in logic. Your brain will fucking frizzle out!

My fridge was empty so I bought 5 bananas and 3 apples. I ate a bunch of them and now there's 3 bananas and 1 apple left.

https://repl.it/repls/SoggyNavyLivedistro

[surreptitious57]

Express for us the abstract notion of apples
The abstract notion of oranges
Then compare them to each other to produce False

A = APPLES
O = ORANGES

A = A [ TRUE ]
O = O [ TRUE ]
A = O [ FALSE ]
O = A [ FALSE ]

[Logik]

A = APPLES
O = ORANGES

What kind of logical objects are A and O ? Strings ? Sets? Integers? Unknowns?

A = A [ TRUE ]
O = O [ TRUE ]
A = O [ FALSE ]
O = A [ FALSE ]

Great! So far we have

Apples are apples.
Oranges are Oranges.
Apples are not Oranges.
Oranges are not Apples.

Now continue your expression and say

Apples are tasty.
Oranges are tasty.

[surreptitious57]

What kind of logical objects are A and O ?

A is the set of all apples
O is the set of all oranges

There are no non apples in set A
There are no non oranges in set O

So each set is both finite and closed and has no other members

[surreptitious57]

Now continue your expression and say

Apples are tasty
Oranges are tasty

A = T [ BETWEEN 0 / I ]
O = T [ BETWEEN 0 / I ]

[Logik]

A is the set of all apples
O is the set of all oranges

Awesome. So it is a set!

How many apples are in A ?
How many apples are in O ?

[Logik]

Now continue your expression and say

Apples are tasty
Oranges are tasty

A = T [ BETWEEN 0 / I ]
O = T [ BETWEEN 0 / I ]

*BEEEEEEEEP* error!

If apples and oranges are equally tasty then....

A = T[1]
O = T[1]
Therefore A = O

BUT you said this just now:

A = O [ FALSE ] <----- contradiction
O = A [ FALSE ] <----- contradiction

Your logic seems to have a lot of sharp edges, eh? I think you need tools that don't explode in your face every 2 minutes...

What you are doing (and what every Aristotelian is doing) is you catch yourself contradicting yourself, then you contrive some simplistic logical expression that resolves the immediate contradiction. Out of sight - out of mind!

Computer science is the study of understanding WHY you keep contradicting yourself. Over. And over. And over. And fixing it as you go along.

[surreptitious57]

If apples and oranges are equally tasty

AT / APPLE TASTE
OT / ORANGE TASTE

AT = AT [ TRUE ]
OT = OT [ TRUE ]
AT = OT [ FALSE ]
OT = AT [ FALSE ]

[surreptitious57]

How many apples are in A ?
How many apples are in O ?

SET A = ALL APPLES
SET O = ALL ORANGES

[Logik]

If apples and oranges are equally tasty

AT / APPLE TASTE
OT / ORANGE TASTE

AT = AT [ TRUE ]
OT = OT [ TRUE ]
AT = OT [ FALSE ]
OT = AT [ FALSE ]

This is going to get fun to keep track of when I add 100 different objects, with 100 different properties

Only 10000 different AT/OT/PT/BT/GT/AS/ED/EF symbols to keep in hour head.
And I don't even know what you are going to do when you run out of alphabet after then 676th permutation.

Great logic you have there! And so much damn work just to avoid one teensy contradiction!

Me - I am a dumb, lazy fuck who likes simple things. Your logic is not for me...

[surreptitious57]

Like I already said this is not suitable for computer language / mathematical algorithms
Because it is too subjective for machines which can only think logically not emotionally

[Logik]

Like I already said this is not suitable for computer language / mathematical algorithms
Because it is too subjective for machines which can only think logically not emotionally

That's just Apologetics.

I showed you a logic which works on computers.

It's much easier for a human to read/understand it than your logic.

[anne]

Fact is your maths ends in contradiction

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... ssible.pdf

1 is a finite number it stops
A finite decimal is one that stops, like 0.157
A non-finite decimal like 0.999... does not stop
when a finite number 1 = a non-finite number 0.999.. then maths ends in contradiction

another way
1 is an integer a whole number
0.888... is a non-integer it is not a whole number
0.999... is a non-integer not a whole number
when a integer 1 =a non-integer 0.999... maths ends in contradiction

Mathematics by ending in contradiction your classical logic proves you can prove anything in maths ie Fermat's last theorem or disprove Fermat's last theorem

[Speakpigeon]

Only in modern mathematical so-called "classical logic", something which is neither classical nor logic.
So, not in classical, Aristotelian logic, no. Apples are not oranges.

Great! Express is for us in logic then.
Express for us the abstract notion of apples.
The abstract notion of oranges.
Then compare them to each other to produce "False"

Why for?
You don't "compare" in logic.
You're a total ignoramus.
I already told you how to do it but your attention span isn't too good. I'm not going to repeat myself.

If Aristotelian logic is THE LAWS of thought then you should be able to translate ALL your English THOUGHTS into logic.
If you can't translate ALL your English into logic, then surely your words are not THOUGHT out?

You've really no idea what you're talking about. You're just a waste time.
Have a nice day.
EB

[Logik]

Why for?
You don't "compare" in logic.
You're a total ignoramus.

Huh?

If logic is the laws of thought. And you don't compare in logic then what DO you "compare" in?
How do you tell the DIFFERENCE between two things? How do you tell that a Cat is not a Dog?

I already told you how to do it but your attention span isn't too good. I'm not going to repeat myself.

Indeed. You said that "knowledge just happens" or something thereabout.

So if your brain can help you tell the difference between things then you should have no problem responding to this challenge: viewtopic.php?f=26&t=26199

Surely your brain can do this for you.

You've really no idea what you're talking about. You're just a waste time.
Have a nice day.
EB

I am not wasting your time. I am making a fool out of you by showing you that knowledge doesn't "just happen".
You have to WORK for it!!!!

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=26199

But of course you won't do it because you have realized that you are in over your head and you have to save face now