Is it merely Trivially True?
November 24th, 2007, search relatedRelated posts :: Is it merely Trivially True? :: Is it merely Trivially True? :: Is it merely Trivially True? :: Is it merely Trivially True?
Michael Eldred wrote:
>ME: If one has already accepted predicate logic as given, then Axiom 0
>is trivially true. But I do not accept predicate logic as given, nor
>the concept of truth/falsity that pertains to predicate logic. For the
>sake of argument, I have shown that even allowing Axiom 0 to stand
>still leads to being. But more philosophically, I have already
>indicated why Axiom 0 cannot be accepted as a self-evident axiom: one
>has to go back to the originary phenomena. There it can be seen that
>the subject/predicate structure breaks down and that the question,
>”what?”, let alone the question, “what am I?”, again becomes malleable,
>full of mystery.
the question ‘what am I?’ never ceased to be full of mystery. why?
because I know that I am; but, not what I am.
BTW, what do you accept instead of predicate logic and what concept of
truth/falsity does it use?
Joe
–
Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first person for the
first person. — H-N Castaneda
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
