This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

My prediction is that you will not translate the sentence into logic. — Lionino

Sentence is the basic constituent of Logic. What do you think Logic is?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Well, I don't know what he is saying either — Lionino

I'm just giving you a way to interpret it that leaves it as a logical implication still. It's of course a poor example anyway. Just giving him the benefit of the doubt

That is not my sentence translated to logic, I am afraid. — Lionino

I am not sure what you mean here. You obviously are avoiding to answer for the question whether you agree or disagree with the example propositional logic shown calling it order, not logic.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

I haven't seen anyone struggling to get out nor being pushed back in; I think you are confabulating.

It's unusual, but it's been seen before. What is unusual is that Corvus has been around for so long without being banned. There are maybe one or two others in his class.

One reaches a point where the only thing to do is laugh and walk away.

Thanks for attempting to explain this to @Metaphyzik.

The other missing bits for them are that p and q in p⊃q need neither be related nor true, and p⊃q might itself be false. Unlike p⊃p , which is always true, and p⊃~p, which is always false.

, you asked for an example of p⊃q. "That there are green crows implies there are no new ideas" is just that: with "There are green crows" for p and "There are no new ideas" for q. It is intended to show how hollow "p⊃q" is. Have a think on it.

It was a joke.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Yes you do. You said every sentence can be translated to logic. Translate my sentence to logic. — Lionino

What's the point of that? What would anyone gain translating what you are saying into logic?

Your example has nothing to do with propositional logic, having the word "then" in it does not make it so. — Lionino

You say it is order, not logic. That is nonsense. Orders are expressed in sentences. The sentences must have truth values to be effective as law or order.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

:up:

Proving your absurd claim. — Lionino

That doesn't prove anything at all. If you exist, you can think, or you don't have to think. It just means, in order for you think, prior to that, you must exist.

Sure. Certainty is often restricted to tautologies. And new ideas are extremely rare. Expression and learning and finding your way to navigate the channel are not.

However, as the pace of technology continues to increase, it seems inevitable that we are going to be getting actual new ideas at least at a glaciers pace

Proving your absurd claim. — Lionino

I am just telling you what is correct from the muddles that you folks have been spewing out. I am not trying to get out from anything like some of the senseless folks here try to make out.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Not all my replies are intended for you. Sometimes the questions and issues raised are rhetorical, or intended for a particular individual in a way that might give them pause in their approach.

I'm sure you do the same thing. Talking to multiple folk requires talking at different levels, or at least placing differing emphasis.

You are at pains to defend Descartes against my probing, but there is no need. I respect his system, and have enough of a grasp of it to see it's consistency. But there are problems with it, as I am sure you would acknowledge.

I seem to be the only one referring back to the topic. My position, again, speaking broadly, is that anything can be brought into doubt; and hence the notion of being "100% certain" is fraught. But also, not everything can be brought into doubt. And hence there are things of which we are certain. We are certain of those things for the purposes of the task at hand.

To that end I attempted to sow some doubt as to "I think therefore I am", by pointing out that it is difficult to give an account of it as an inference. To some extent that has been a success.

I'm not at present aware of a part of this discussion where you and I are at great odds.

No, you said any sentence can be put into logic. Put my sentence into logic — Lionino

You must be joking telling anyone putting your sentence into logic. Are you Descartes?

I am not trying to get out from anything like some of the senseless folks try to make out here. — Corvus

You never posted those pages from your textbook, so...

I'm not sure you got the point, which had nothing to do with new ideas.

Here's another p⊃q: "If the milk is sour, then your bank account is empty".

Or "The first letter of the alphabet is 7, so Fred is a zebra".

Don't feed the troll?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

No, you said any sentence can be put into logic. Put my sentence into logic. — Lionino

Do you agree the orders must be expressed in sentences, and the sentences must have truth values to be effective as the orders?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

If that is true, translate "If you had been there, you would have seen that the fireworks went off at the same as the bell rang" to formal logic. — Lionino

I have asked you first, but you never answered my question. Is this the way you evade the question which will collapse all your points?

I don't care about your gibbersh. You said: — Lionino

Do you agree the orders and rules must be expressed in sentences, and the sentences must have truth values to be effective as the orders and rules?

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.