On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:11:06 -0600, Virgil <email@example.com> wrote:
>In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, > Lester Zick <DontBother@nowhere.net> wrote: > > >> >> "Not" is the tautological alternative to "not not". The excluded >> >> middle is the reason we must reduce possible predicates to an absolute >> >> mechanical minimum. >> > >> >Then where do "not not not" and "not not not not", and so on, fit in? >> >> Do "not" and "not not" exhaustive possibilities for truth? > >Not to me.
Then what does?
Neither of them says anything to me by itself. They might >have some sort of meaning in context, but never in isolation.