Prev: A[x, y) by an algorithm of constant length
Next: Godels seconded theorem ends in paradox-simple proof
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 9 Jun 2010 01:31
Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> writes:

> So you could, for example, say (1) is true in the naturals while I
> could _equally_ say ~(1) is false?

We can all say anything we want. This has no relevance to anything.

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: Nam Nguyen on 9 Jun 2010 01:52
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> writes:
>
>> So you could, for example, say (1) is true in the naturals while I
>> could _equally_ say ~(1) is false?
>
> We can all say anything we want. This has no relevance to anything.
>

Rather, you can say anything you want and that has no relevance to
anything here.
From: Aatu Koskensilta on 9 Jun 2010 01:57
Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> writes:

> Rather, you can say anything you want and that has no relevance to
> anything here.

Quite, that I can say whatever I want has no relevance to anything in
this thread. So why go on about how people can say this and that?

--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta(a)uta.fi)

"Wovon man nicht sprechan kann, dar�ber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
From: Nam Nguyen on 9 Jun 2010 14:37
Aatu Koskensilta wrote:
> Nam Nguyen <namducnguyen(a)shaw.ca> writes:
>
>> Rather, you can say anything you want and that has no relevance to
>> anything here.
>
> Quite, that I can say whatever I want has no relevance to anything in
> this thread. So why go on about how people can say this and that?
>

That's not meant to be an acknowledgment one has the "right" to say
anything in a public forum: that's given & no acknowledgment is needed.
Rather my, statement above is meant to point out to you that your
responding posts on technical issues are irrelevant to the subjects at
hand that you apparently have some interests to discuss.

If you don't have a genuine intention to technically examine and discuss
foundational issues and only want to start a flame war (or add more fuel
to it) then it's too bad. But I still have the "right" to point out
"how people can say this and that": in doing so I still could explain
whatever the idea I'd like to advance. There are different ways to say of
the same thing of course.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Prev: A[x, y) by an algorithm of constant length
Next: Godels seconded theorem ends in paradox-simple proof