The excluded middle-path? :) Law of the excluded agnostic?
Faiths are 'fuzzy' logic (to say the least). They're neither necesarily transitive nor intransitive, probably cos they are solely human (no empirical interference in *that* crazy world) so they can break whatever rules they like.
Aristotle teaching Logic:
A - So Jesus was a prophet? Man - Yes. A - And he said he was the son of God? Man - Yes. A - And prophets speak the infallible word of God? Man - Er, yes? A - So you have faith that he was the son of God? Man - Er......no. A - Okay, two plates of aporia to table five, please.
Casby the rusty logician
p.s. Is (not)B[f] equivalent to D[f]? (Like fun it is)
D[f] would seem to be closer to B[not f] rather than not B[f]. There are some problems with either approach, though. Things that break. Logical inconsistencies. That kind of thing. Keeping D[f] and B[f] distinct seems to make that go away.
Classical logic definitely doesn't work too well. So, do you still beat your husband? ;-)
Can't you just negate B and leave D out altogether?
Casby the exhausted ghost
p.s. My highest mark in Cambridge was for a Logic essay (surprisingly): "Define Equivalence classes". I got a 1st++! Still only got a 2.1 for the paper though, damn Plurals and Conditionals :0
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Meeple
Faiths are 'fuzzy' logic (to say the least). They're neither necesarily transitive nor intransitive, probably cos they are solely human (no empirical interference in *that* crazy world) so they can break whatever rules they like.
Aristotle teaching Logic:
A - So Jesus was a prophet?
Man - Yes.
A - And he said he was the son of God?
Man - Yes.
A - And prophets speak the infallible word of God?
Man - Er, yes?
A - So you have faith that he was the son of God?
Man - Er......no.
A - Okay, two plates of aporia to table five, please.
Casby the rusty logician
p.s. Is (not)B[f] equivalent to D[f]? (Like fun it is)
Re: Meeple
Classical logic definitely doesn't work too well. So, do you still beat your husband? ;-)
('Law of the excluded agnostic' -- I like that!)
Re: Meeple
Casby the exhausted ghost
p.s. My highest mark in Cambridge was for a Logic essay (surprisingly): "Define Equivalence classes". I got a 1st++! Still only got a 2.1 for the paper though, damn Plurals and Conditionals :0