Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

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


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math.independent

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

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View  
Tucsondrew@me.com

Posts: 732
Registered: 5/24/13
Re: 2.25 - The meaning of "implies" in mythmatics.
Posted: Jul 24, 2014 2:56 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

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





Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.