Nicholas Ferreira

Ok, I understood, thanks for the explanation and the link :D Also, do you have any recomendation of book to read specifically about this? I'm reading ...

But isn't implicit on any argument that some A is A? I mean, why do we need to put the identity law in a premise? And I really can't understand why "S...

It's a negative existential one, but any universal proposition can be transformed into an existential one. (?x) ? ¬(?x)

But this is really a problem. Answer me: how do you know that a winged horse doesn't exist? Unless you define horse as being something wingless, you c...

Oh, i think i got it. The problem is that the existential quantification does affirm that something exists, while universal quantification only states...

Honestly, how do you know that winged horses are non-existent? I'm noy saying that they exists or that I believe that they exist, but you can't affirm...

What do you mean by "empty terms"? Are you refering to arguments with undefined variables? But why is the conclusion false? I mean, I know that horses...

Well, petitio principii is a fallacy in which an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion. It's a kind of circular argument. E.g., "Char...

Well, points are also adimensional, but displayed in continuum succession they make a line, which is dimensional. A line, on the other hand, contains ...

Why? Of course, you would need to know if an atom in a far away galaxy would impact on your actions, but you don't need everything that is happening w...

You are right. When I said about truth tables I was thinking on truth tables of arguments, by which an argument can be proved or invalided by checking...

I'm not being verbose. You said inferences are by definition not deduction. I'm just asking you what definition are you using, because I pointed an ex...

What is the definition of inference? Why can't it be treated as a deduction? I mean, from "A?B" and "B?C" you deduce that "A?C", right?

Ok, I think i got it. Thank you for your answer!

Yeah, i'm talking about traditional logic. But by proving it by truth table wouldn't you already be relying on the inference as a valid method, since ...

Well, this argument isn't valid... An argument is invalid when there is a case where all it's premises are true and the conclusion is false. This is b...

1. V ? T 2. ¬V ? H 3. ¬T ? ¬H // T Proof: 4. H ? T ..... 3, transposition 5. ¬V ? T ..... 2,4, hypothetical syllogism 6. (V?T)^(¬V?T) ..... 1,5, conju...