Jiri Lebl wrote: > Lester Zick wrote: >> Tautological combinations such as "A, not A" exhaust all possibilities >> for truth unless I'm very much mistaken. > > Good thing you admit it. Yes you are very much mistaken. For example > take A be the statement: "Is P(N) = aleph_1 true in ZFC".
That's a question, and non-sense at that; sentences aren't true or false in theories. Zick is no doubt mistaken about many things, but your rebuttal of his ideas is itself rather confused. The continuum hypothesis does not provide an example of an A such that "A, not A" do not exhaust all possibilities.
-- Aatu Koskensilta (email@example.com)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen" - Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus