[lit-ideas] Re: "Promissory Materialism" Correction
- From: "Adriano Palma" <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 19:31:11 +0200
** For Your Eyes Only **
** High Priority **
** Reply Requested by 11/15/2011 (Tuesday) **
sorry, since you hair chopping
the contradiction is obtained by logical negations
your reading if correct ought to be (meaning the reading of your sentences)
a it is not the case that there is snow here
~a there is snow here
[you may decide to eliminate the space indexical and presume implicit the
termporal one, or fix them to an arbitrary fixed point of choice-
then you have acontradiction
>>> Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx> 11/15/2011 7:16 PM >>>
My posts on the following, and the issue of materialism/physicalism as
preferred terminology [which suggested 'World 1' is preferable to either], went
astray last week. I take it these posts were not received on the list. Having
re-subscribed, where I had previously proposed:-
"A. Here there is snow. B. Here there is no snow.
Assuming "Here" refers to same point in space-time, these A and B contradict."
Adriano then commented:- "strictly they aren't even contradictory". But they
are contradictory and strictly so. A is equivalent to "There is such a thing as
snow here". B is equivalent to the negation of A viz. "There is no such thing
as snow here".
So A is a p, and B is its negation non-p: these do contradict, as any p and its
logical negation contradict.
D
London
Please find our Email Disclaimer here: http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer/
Other related posts:
