Gray_Area comments on Infinite Certainty - Less Wrong

32 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 09 January 2008 06:49AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Tags: bayesian

Comments (114)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Gray_Area 09 January 2008 12:29:30PM -1 points [-]

Paul Gowder said:

"We can go even stronger than mathematical truths. How about the following statement?

~(P &~P)

I think it's safe to say that if anything is true, that statement (the flipping law of non-contradiction) is true."

Amusingly, this is one of the more controversial tautologies to bring up. This is because constructivist mathematicians reject this statement.

Comment author: pnrjulius 27 May 2012 03:48:04AM 0 points [-]

No, they reject P V ~P.

They do not reject ~(P&~P). Only paraconsistent logicians do that.

And paraconsistent logicians are silly.