4 ms·
I think you're demonstrating my point. It sounds like you're going with what you intuitively think "implies" must mean like you would if you saw it written in a
by seanwilson 6y ago
I think you're demonstrating my point. It sounds like you're going with what you intuitively think "implies" must mean like you would if you saw it written in a news article, when instead the article is using a formal logic definition that would appear appears often in logic/math proofs.
You really need to look at the truth table the implies operator and read off the answer from there. There'd be no confusion if the operator didn't have a name that roughly matched something we say in casual language.
- clairity 6y agoand that's exactly my point. you need to specify 'formal logic', otherwise, it's underspecified.
- seanwilson 6y agoAh, okay. Yes, it's ambiguous to the point of being a trick question to me.
- clairity 6y agoyah, if the author wants to assert a (perhaps deceptive) pedantic logical conclusion about others, then they should be particularly keen to avoid making pedantic logical errors themselves.