|
|
 | | From: | Lester Zick | | Subject: | Re: Epistemology 101 | | Date: | Thu, 30 Dec 2004 16:03:47 GMT |
|
|
 | On 30 Dec 2004 02:12:58 -0800, "Mike" in
comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>Some true things are facts (because some others are just values
>assigned to variables)
>
>All facts are true (by virtue of being facts)
>
>Some things are false (obviously)
>
>Some things are facts (while some others exist only as hypothesis)
>
>Some things are true (obviously)
>
>Some confuse values and propositions (Zick confuses values and
>propositions)
>
>p is a proposition (because I define so)
>
>p can have the value true or false (in two-value logic of course)
>
>That I wrote down p is a fact (obviously)
>
>But p in itself may not be a fact (here comes some confusion)
>
>p: the king of America is tall
>
>~p: the king of America is not tall?
>
>rather:
>
>~p: it is no the case(the king of America is tall)
>
>well, what is not the case? the king or the tall or America does not
>exist or all together or the supposed fact or the truth or falsity of p
>or parts of p?
>
>Warning: speaking about logic is an exercise in futility. Use math.
>Natural language and logic do not mix well together and create all
>sorts of paranoia.
Yes, well, we can all appreciate your excellent example of that.
Regards - Lester
|
|
|
