Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.



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 UTC7, 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 UTC7, 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



