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"