Author:
Wade A. Tisthammer
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 05/ 2/04 3:29pm
In reply to:
Damoclese
's message, "A page for all the wade's out there" on 04/29/04 5:16pm
>From the page: "Logic and math do not, and cannot,
>generate new truths about nature. They only expose and
>reformulate the truths contained in our models,
>theories and laws. "
If this means that synthetic a priori truths are impossible, then I disagree with the author.
> * One kind is the argument which may have
>faultless logic but is based on premises which have
>not, or cannot, be experimentally verified. Another
>kind is based on premises which are not part of any
>well established and accepted scientific theory.
Not all correct premises must be part of any accepted scientific theory. Mathematical and logical proofs are constructed all the time without referring to scientific theories, because they are simply not relevant. Yet clearly they are not empty.
>I reccomend that everyone interested in the topic read
>this page, especially Wade. Logic
Exactly where do you think my beliefs about logic are mistaken? Which beliefs about logic do I hold do you think are mistaken?
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
