On 01/23/2013 11:40 AM, Jesse F. Hughes wrote: > WM<firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > >> On 23 Jan., 14:39, "Jesse F. Hughes"<je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote: >> >>> If he wants to do math without the axiom of infinity, let him! >> >> No, I show that it is not possible to do math with that axiom in a >> consistent way. >> >>> But >>> his bloviating about inconsistency in ZF should occasionally be >>> challenged, since it is so easy to show that he's full of bluster, >>> jumping from topic to topic because he honestly knows that none of his >>> arguments survive any real examination. >> >> Try to find the difference between the Binary Trees. That should open >> your eyes. > > Why not finish our discussion of N first? Why must you change the > subject? >
As an aside on debates and such, it's sometimes said that controlling the "terms of reference" is important, as in: "What is the issue? What is the query? What is the question to be debated?"
This raises the question: What is relevant? (to the question of the debate).
Naturally, I'll grant that here, "Binary Trees" is irrelevant ! to the question of ZF consistency ...
-- dracut:/# lvm vgcfgrestore File descriptor 9 (/.console_lock) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 993: sh Please specify a *single* volume group to restore.