> >> Well this point is well taken: the tautological exhaustion of truth is > >> an assumption. However the point I would make in this connection is > >> whether there can be any alternative. In other words can there be an > >> alternative to the tautological exhaustion of truth that is actually > >> "not a tautology"?
For any assumption, one can refuse to make that assumption. And the refusal to assume an excluded middle, which constructionists have refused to assume, is an alternative to Zick's "tautological exhaustion of truth" > > > > > >Those who reject the axiom of the excluded middle in favor of > >constructive mathematics make, and,implement just such an assumption. > > > >Thus Zick must assume something to get anything. > > I think you deleted just the part of my reply which shows there can be > no alternative to tautologies in mechanical terms.
One cannot demonstrate anything without having something on which to base that demonstration. So how does Zick propose to demonstrate that "there can be no alternative to tautologies in mechanical terms"?
I only snipped a section in which no such demonstration occured.
> Whether you assume the exhaustive truth of tautologies is another > issue.
That is merely another form of the excluded middle, which, as we have seen, need not be assumed.