Prev: Need some help with a styles page
Next: Newbie question
From: Evertjan. on 11 Feb 2010 05:25
Jukka K. Korpela wrote on 10 feb 2010 in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

>>> No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it.
>>
>> Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example?
>
> I wasn't asking for an example.

Negative statements can be disproved by just one positive example.

"apples do not hang on trees"

Showing one apple hanging on a tree is enough to disprove that.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
From: dorayme on 11 Feb 2010 15:35
In article <Xns9D1C74452C2FBeejj99(a)194.109.133.242>,
"Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:

> Jukka K. Korpela wrote on 10 feb 2010 in
> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
>
> >>> No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it.
> >>
> >> Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example?
> >
> > I wasn't asking for an example.
>
> Negative statements can be disproved by just one positive example.
>

Not strictly true.

--
dorayme
From: Evertjan. on 12 Feb 2010 09:55
dorayme wrote on 11 feb 2010 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

> In article <Xns9D1C74452C2FBeejj99(a)194.109.133.242>,
> "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:
>
>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote on 10 feb 2010 in
>> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
>>
>> >>> No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it.
>> >>
>> >> Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example?
>> >
>> > I wasn't asking for an example.
>>
>> Negative statements can be disproved by just one positive example.
>>
>
> Not strictly true.

True can only be strictly so,
otherwise it is not true,
but false,
disregarding cross browser incompatibilities.

(not true) and (not false) is false.


--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
From: dorayme on 12 Feb 2010 17:03
In article <Xns9D1DA1F822065eejj99(a)194.109.133.242>,
"Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:

> dorayme wrote on 11 feb 2010 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
>
> > In article <Xns9D1C74452C2FBeejj99(a)194.109.133.242>,
> > "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Negative statements can be disproved by just one positive example.
> >>
> >
> > Not strictly true.
>
> True can only be strictly so,
> otherwise it is not true,

Very well, let me accept this for now (though you are mistaken in
this case) and say instead that your "Negative statements can be
disproved by just one positive example" is not true.

> but false,
> disregarding cross browser incompatibilities.
>

By the same token, false is false and it cannot be injected with
a bit of truth by the clause about cross browser
incompatibilities.

> (not true) and (not false) is false.

--
dorayme
From: Ben C on 12 Feb 2010 17:13
On 2010-02-12, Evertjan. <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:
> dorayme wrote on 11 feb 2010 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
>
>> In article <Xns9D1C74452C2FBeejj99(a)194.109.133.242>,
>> "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort(a)interxnl.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Jukka K. Korpela wrote on 10 feb 2010 in
>>> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:
>>>
>>> >>> No, that does not make any sense, and I had no reason to "know" it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes, it does make sense. Do you need another example?
>>> >
>>> > I wasn't asking for an example.
>>>
>>> Negative statements can be disproved by just one positive example.
>>>
>>
>> Not strictly true.
>
> True can only be strictly so,
> otherwise it is not true,
> but false,

But if it's strictly false, then its negation would have to be strictly
true. And if not strictly false, then why is non-strict falsehood
allowed but not non-strict truth?

For example I might say "John is good" of someone who is a generally
good person but who, like everyone, is not absolutely perfect. So not
strictly true.

But if it were strictly false, then "John is not good" would have to be
strictly true. But clearly that is not strictly true of John-- I just
said he's a generally good person.

If something's not strictly true then it's not strictly false either.
The best we can say about it is that it's not strict.

> disregarding cross browser incompatibilities.
>
> (not true) and (not false) is false.

I wondered if dorayme was thinking of true but unprovable statements.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Prev: Need some help with a styles page
Next: Newbie question