Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: 2.25 - The meaning of "implies" in mythmatics.
Replies: 1   Last Post: Jul 24, 2014 2:56 PM

 Tucsondrew@me.com Posts: 1,161 Registered: 5/24/13
Re: 2.25 - The meaning of "implies" in mythmatics.
Posted: Jul 24, 2014 2:56 PM

On Thursday, July 24, 2014 11:49:27 AM UTC-7, John Gabriel wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 July 2014 20:38:51 UTC+2, Zeit Geist wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 24, 2014 12:09:00 AM UTC-7, John Gabriel wrote:
>
> > > "If John Gabriel is always right, then John Gabriel is never wrong."
> > > Suppose that p = John Gabriel is always right and that q = John Gabriel is never wrong.
> > > Then according to the nonsensical imply truth table:
> > > ¬p OR q
> > > Assume p and q are FALSE.
> > > Then, ¬FALSE OR FALSE = TRUE.
> > > So, if "John Gabriel is always right" is FALSE (that is, John Gabriel is NOT always right), then *John Gabriel is always right*

Here you Claim the Conclusion is True, by Virtue of the Premise being False.
That's NOT what anyone is Saying.

> > No one is saying that When the Premise is False, we have that the Conclusion is True.
> > We are saying that When the Premise is False, the Implication itself, p -> q, is True.

>
> Idiot. Everyone knows this. Why do you comment when you do not understand?

Then why did you Write something to the Contrary?

ZG