thomblake comments on Supernatural Math - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (56)
While this might seem overly pedantic (hardly something to complain about in this discussion), I'd like to point out that this definition only matches the usual one if you also accept the law of non-contradiction. More precisely, a system is consistent if it does not contain a contradiction.
Also, your definitions of Mathematics and "logically follows" don't seem very... good. Did you make them up?
EDIT: changed "excluded middle" to "non-contradiction". duh.
ETA: Yeah, my point was stupid. Nevermind.
I see what I was doing here. The law of excluded middle is equivalent to the law of non-contradiction. Probably why I had the two confused. Example in sentential logic: