colonel@sunybcs.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) (09/29/86)
> Your posting now suggests that you have a different idea in mind. > Why not just use the definition I gave? > Let's drop it. Most logic books have a definition of fallacious > reasoning, and if you don't like those definitions, that's up to you. Thanks for withdrawing your objection! I think we all can respect your commitment to the language of formal logic, even those of us who agree with T. Moody that ordinary language is better suited for philosophical discourse. I hope it will not bother you if we also use "imply" in its ordinary sense. Some mathematicians get awfully confused when they hear of a _person's_ implying something ... "Mathematicians are a kind of Frenchmen. When you tell them something, they translate it into their own language, and right away it is something completely different." --Goethe "Their logic ties you up and wrecks you." --the Police, "De Doo Doo Doo, De Da Da Da" -- Col. G. L. Sicherman UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel CS: colonel@buffalo-cs BI: colonel@sunybcs, csdsiche@sunyabvc