Date: Feb 21, 2013 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: when indecomposability is decomposable
On 2/21/2013 3:01 AM, Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz wrote:
> In <yfGdnVH3XuwxeLnMnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@giganews.com>, on 02/20/2013
> at 09:03 AM, fom <fomJUNK@nyms.net> said:
>> The validity of the inference being justified by
>> what stance?
> The axioms and the rules of inference.
>> A number of years ago, there was a John Correy on these newsgroups
>> who formulated a set of axioms that could be syntactically
>> manipulated to "prove" the existence of non-self-identicals.
> Within his theory.
>> He had been hammered on the basis of the ontological import
>> of x=x.
> Ontology is irrelevant. What matters is whether his work was
> consistent and interesting.
> BTW, there was a serious shift in how mathematicians viewed
> foundational issues after, e.g., Gödel, Cohen.
Yes. I know.