Re: Leibniz Semantics

From: George Levy <GLevy.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:44:49 -0800

So far so good

Marchal wrote:

> rwas rwas wrote:
>
> >IF:
> > AB:C
> > 11 1
> > 10 0
> > 01 1
> > 00 1
> >
> >Can someone explain the "IF" table?

Ok. it could be defined that way.... but this allows weird results to be
obtained..... It may be safer to define it as


IF:
  AB:C
  11 1
  10 0
  01 x
  00 x

 where x is undefined

>
>
> (2 = 1) -> Russell is the pope
>
>
> The correct answer should have been:
>
> (2=1) is false, so (2=1) -> X, is always true, as you
> can seen in the truth table of "IF".
>
> A->B means really nothing
> more that A is false OR B is true.
>



George
Received on Wed Mar 28 2001 - 12:54:50 PST