In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Lester Zick <DontBother@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 21:38:24 -0600, Virgil <email@example.com> wrote: > > >In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, > > Lester Zick <DontBother@nowhere.net> wrote: > > > > >> Well, Nam, without going on endlessly I would like to ask if arguments > >> based on "absolute truth" are indeed futile, are arguments based on > >> "absolute falseness" necessarily equally futile? > > > >If one excludes logical tautologies like "if P then P" and logical > >contradictions like "if P then not P", yes. > > I had other tautologies in mind of the general form "P, not P". But > the general argument remains regardless. Universal alternatives to > universal falseness must perforce be universally true.
Provided that there are any of either, maybe. But I cannot assent without seeing exemplars.