2 ms·
If logic isn't consistent, then logic isn't valid. I'm not assuming specialized definitions of "consistency" and "validity" here, just your normal everyday lay
by javert 14y ago
If logic isn't consistent, then logic isn't valid.
I'm not assuming specialized definitions of "consistency" and "validity" here, just your normal everyday layman's usage.
- chris_wot 14y agoWell, you were responding to someone who was using the correct formal terms. You, after all, don't dispute the second theorem - but given it uses the term "consistent" you can hardly complain when someone makes their argument using the same terminology as the theorem you agree with! Interested in what you define "consistent" and "valid" as in laymans terms though.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- javert 14y agoI'd rather continue the other thread of discussion we have going, than this one. Anyway, you can look up "consistent" and "valid" in any dictionary to find out what I mean.