In article <email@example.com>, WM <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 24 Mrz., 16:13, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mar 24, 4:03 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote: > > > > Induction proves that every > > > > True > > > > and all > > > > False > > So you do no longer adhere to ZFC+FOPL?
ZFC+FOPL? does no support WM's alleged proofs, whether by induction or any other method.
> There a proof "for every" is a proof "for all".
Induction only proves
"For every member of some inductive set" and "for all members of that inductive set"
> Unfortunately current > logic does not distinguish.