3 ms·
I’m not imposing any constraints - the point is that inconsistent formulations are not interesting or relevant to the argument no matter what system of rules yo
by derriz 2y ago
I’m not imposing any constraints - the point is that inconsistent formulations are not interesting or relevant to the argument no matter what system of rules you look at. This has nothing to do with any particular formalism. I think the difficulty here is that words like completeness and inconsistency have very specific meanings in the context of formal logic - which do not match their use in everyday discussion.
- moefh 2y agoI think we're talking past each other at this point. You seem to have brushed past without acknowledging my point about systems without the principle of explosion, and I'm afraid I must have missed one or more points you tried to make along the way, because what you're saying doesn't make much sense to me anymore. This is probably a good point to close the discussion -- I'm thankful for the cordial talk, even if we ultimately couldn't reach common ground.
- derriz 2y agoYes! I think this medium isn’t helpful for understanding here but it’s always pleasant to disagree while remaining civil. It doesn’t help that I’m trying to reply on my phone (I’m traveling at moment) - in an environment which isn’t conducive to subtle understanding. All the best to you!