RE: Logic deemed illogical! Area man protests.


Subject: RE: Logic deemed illogical! Area man protests.
From: Robbie (shok@netcom.com)
Date: Mon Jan 10 2000 - 17:56:06 EST


<< I could just as easily pick '>' to be an operator that means "is the
father of." Then, it would not be transitive as my grandfather is
clearly not also my father. Once we fix a meaning to '>' then it is
transitive or not. The way you are talking about such operators though,
you really want to imply that '>' is transitive long before a meaning is
fixed for it. >>

But the property isn't changing, only how you're referencing it, right?
If '>' is chosen to mean "is the father of" and '&' is used in the place
of '>', all that is done is exchanging one operator for the other and
the principle still holds true.

If rock A is bigger than rock B, and rock B is bigger than rock C, then
rock A is bigger than rock C. You can change the definitions of the
words around all you like, but short of splitting rocks, the
relationships of the rocks will not be affected.

A rose by any other name. . .

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
|+-+-+-+-+-+-+-sanity is relative+-+-+-+-+-+-+|
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Feb 28 2000 - 08:38:06 EST