Banno

Here's another outright error. Or if you prefer: ??(?^~?)?~? Or if you think it is only truth-functional if it fits in a truth-table, https://i.ibb.co...

Maybe not as much as you think. I'm not seeing a salient point here. Pretty demonstrably, you have made a series of claims that have been shown to be ...

"Machine", singular. So back to my point, that and so What I hope to have done over the last page is to show that you are mixing logics, resulting in ...

I seem to have reduced you to reciting gobbledygook. My apologies.

What? The reductio shows that A?(B?¬B)?~A. As pointed out. It could equally be used to show that A?~A?(B?¬B); but that was not the issue you raised. E...

A reductio is as much a proof in classical propositional logic as is modus tollens. Simply because I matched your example, which has and not ~A?A?(B?¬...

Ah, so it's an esoteric mystery. :wink: The consequent is (B?¬B) The negation of the consequent is ~(B?¬B) Affirming the negation of the consequent is...

Your loss. Then the thread is in erorr. (p ^ ~p) is false in classical propositional logic. Not at all. A contradiction in first order predicate logic...

So far as I can see, it was you who proffered I'm puzzling over what this might be. As has been explained at length, in classical propositional logic ...

This seems to be the source of your difficulties. As has been explained, in classical logic a contradiction is false. Dialetheism considers what must ...

Yep. Worth noting that parsing this correctly shows that the original was incomplete - implied nothing. More generally, parsing natural languages in f...

An obligation is simply something you ought to do. Your inability to make sense of obligation is not our problem. Eventually this reduces to a persona...

You conclude that there are no such thing as obligations. Compare: The first appears to be a truth-apt proposition, whereas the second isn’t. Beyond t...

Well, I'm only too pleased to provide you with the raw material.

But yet again, here you are…. :wink:

I re-read MMP this morning and was again in awe of the complexity of her thinking. Better not to assume, so I went with "may". She almost certainly wo...

And yet it lives, five years on. Some rules ruin the game, others make it more interesting. One way to fix the game might be to oblige players to list...

One of the failings of 'mercan English is its inability to distinguish it's ass from its arse.

Yeah, good point. I did that too quickly.

I think I have explained the situation at some length, but perhaps more can be said. Thanks for this topic, one more interesting than most. I think yo...

Note 's testimony.

Looks a lot like deontology to me. You are suggesting that we ought be virtuous because it is our duty. That's not how I understand virtue ethics. It'...

Well, no. She also committed to marrying you. She did not just intend to do so, she undertook doing so. She said she would. She bound herself to you. ...

Cheers. I don't see anything here that has not already been addressed. Have a read of PI §201 and consider if a single principle ever implies a certai...

Yes. She undertook to marry you. Either she reneged on that obligation or you allowed her to leave it. yep.

Well, what is a promise, if not the undertaking of an obligation? Presumably, nothing, and there are no such things as promises. Yet there are promise...

There's sunshine, for the first time an a few weeks, so later.

So what do you think - if someone undertakes an obligation, are they thereby obligated? If so, then you seem to be claiming that making a promise is n...

If you do not agree that someone who undertakes an obligation is not thereby obligated, then I have no more to offer you.

Failure to commit.

Without (8), the promise does not count as undertaking an obligation. And that, apparently to all except your good self, is the very point of making a...

Sorry - can you give an account of what making a promise is, that does not involve placing oneself under an obligation? Is it your contention that one...

Well, that's what promising is. I'm at a loss to explain it any further. Can you offer an alternative meaning for "promise" Oh, very nice. I like that...

Then what is it you are suggesting?

Again, what is the problem?

Ok. Is this not correct? My access to the OED is not functioning at present. I don't see what it is you are saying is problematic.

They are not unrelated. One performs an algorithm by following set rules - principles. You equate rational thought with following a principle. Yet the...

Wiki might suffice to show you the difference between material implication and strict implication. That might be what you have in mind. Tones is corre...

You seem to have missed the point. The utterance of T counts as placing S under an obligation to do A. That is, promising counts as placing oneself un...

Yep. A workable solution, but a bit convolute for my taste.

Again, a tool not unlike the tree proof generator, that produced a png or other image that could be inserted into a post, would be most helpful.

'tis a think of beauty, but cannot be used to show truth tables within posts in TPF. Other methods are clumsy.

So a few conclusions. (A implies B) and (A implies notB) do not contradict one another. It would be useful to have a page that generates an image of a...

Well, you might be disappointed. It's the view that the world is made only of particles, of bits of matter, bashing against each other. That's a view ...

Seems as my original point is being distorted here. That was that making decisions is not always algorithmic. The APS magazine provides a neat summati...

Well, the distinction between the various accounts is not so hard-and-fast. Deontologists will still act to produce the best consequences, other thing...

@"Michael", how odd. So for you, someone who places themselves under an obligation is not, thereby, under an obligation. Ok.

So does the sense of injustice include, or perhaps derive from, a desire to make things better? Then it makes not difference if the source of the inju...

I think it a boxed beetle.