2 ms·
The claim was that if you accept a false premise, you can prove any false thing to be true. What we've actually seen is random claiming of contradictory things
by DangitBobby 6y ago
The claim was that if you accept a false premise, you can prove any false thing to be true. What we've actually seen is random claiming of contradictory things that supposedly follow by people trying to appear clever. It so obviously doesn't follow that it's a little strange we are having this conversation. If the conclusions themselves can be seen to be contradictory, anyone can dismantle your proof and show that it's bogus, even if you do accept the original premise. So the claim is bogus, and it's probably not a real story anyway.
- unanswered 6y agoThe most wonderful thing about mathematics (and by extension logic) is that we don't have to give a shit what random people like yourself want to guess on the internet. We have actual proof checkers. They can show the correctness of proof terms for exfalso from more basic, more obviously correct principles. Those proof terms can't be "dismantled"; they're proved correct no matter how much you whine that you don't like them.