Date: Mar 22, 2013 3:26 PM
Author: fom
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On 3/22/2013 2:04 PM, Virgil wrote:
> In article
> <5192f6a9-d454-4a7c-b6b1-a6bbc5c3ff77@5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
> WM <mueckenh@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>

>> On 22 Mrz., 08:19, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mar 22, 7:38 am, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>>>

>
>>>> This proves that we can remove all finite lines from the
>>>> list without changing the contents of the remaining list.

>
> WRONG! As usual!

>>>
>>> No, it only proves that you can remove any finite
>>> set of lines.-

>>
>> And what is in your opinion beyond any finite set of lines?

>
> That anything "beyond" a finite set of lines is not a finite set of
> lines.

>>
>> Do you believe that induction does not hold for all natural numbers?

>
> Inductive arguments hold for any sets that are order isomorphic to the
> set of naturals.
>
>
> What misleads WM to believe he is competent at mathematics, when al lthe
> evidence contradicts it.
>




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxastic_logic#Types_of_reasoners

see "conceited reasoner"