In article <email@example.com>, Lester Zick <DontBother@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 21:37:01 -0600, Virgil <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > >In article <email@example.com>, > > Lester Zick <DontBother@nowhere.net> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 20 Jul 2006 13:12:21 -0600, Virgil <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > >> >In mathematics, all assumptions (axiom systems) are merely conditional, > >> >to see what will follow from them. When what follows proves useful or > >> >interesting, one tends to codify those assumptions. but that never > >> >requires that one claims them true is any absolute sense. Such > >> >assumptions are always "what if's". > >> > >> It's clear in faith based math > > > >"Faith based"? There is no "faith" required for axiomatic based > >mathematics, only logic. > > Sure. And assumptions of truth of axioms doesn't make axiomatic math > faith based. Yadayada whatever. > > ~v~~
Truth of "If P then Q" need not require assuming the truth of "P".
If P and Q are compound statements such that Q is false whenever P is false, then "If P then Q" will be true regardless of the truth of P.
All one is assuming is that formal logic works as advertised, which is not. strictly speaking, a mathematical assumption at all.