Date: Mar 24, 2013 11:47 AM
Author: William Hughes
Subject: Re: Matheology § 224

On Mar 24, 4:26 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
> On 24 Mrz., 16:13, William Hughes <wpihug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > On Mar 24, 4:03 pm, WM <mueck...@rz.fh-augsburg.de> wrote:
>
> >  Induction proves that every
>
> > True
>
> >  and all
>
> > False
>
> So you do no longer adhere to ZFC+FOPL?
> There a proof "for every" is a proof "for all".


However, in WM speak a proof "for every"
is not always a proof "for all".