Not for all P. P must have certain qualities to be either true or false: call it truth-capable or false-capable. Lacking those, the LEM, then, simply does not apply.The LEM dictates that P must be either true or false. — Metaphysician Undercover
These are two very distinct ways of looking at inertia with completely different implications. But which one is correct? — Metaphysician Undercover
Not for all P. P must have certain qualities to be either true or false: call it truth-capable or false-capable. Lacking those, the LEM, then, simply does not apply. — tim wood
One of the two propositions in such instances must be true and the other false, but we cannot say determinately that this or that is false, but must leave the alternative undecided. — tim wood
Yet this view leads to an impossible conclusion; for we see that both deliberation, and action are causative with regard to the future, and that, to speak more generally, in those things which are not continuously actual there is a potentiality in either direction. Such things may either be or not be; events also therefore may either take place or not take place. There are many obvious instances of this.
...
It is therefore plain that it is not of necessity that everything is or takes place; but in some instances there are real alternatives, in which case the affirmation is no more true and no more false than the denial; while some exhibit a predisposition and general tendency in one direction or the other, and yet can issue in the opposite direction by exception.
And here we are at absolute presuppositions. They're both absolutely presupposed in their respective systems. Not,, then, a question of right, but of efficacy. You mention the "force" of gravity. Absolutely, and it works: F = G(m1)(m2) / r^2. F of course for force. The only trouble being that these days and for some time, gravity has been understood not as a force, but as a curvature of spacetime, objects merely following shortest distance paths, geodesics, through spacetime. Gravity as force is a sometimes convenient fiction, and the math works well-enough, but not how it works according to best understanding.
So we're back to models. And your point remains obscure and obscured. — tim wood
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.