Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy

Newsgroups	sci.logic
Date	2023-07-22 19:37 -0700
References	(17 earlier) <d8ba8944-d9e4-1677-264c-e9f2d0d1bec2@att.net> <a1d07d57-39e9-4b3c-9f07-47ce689c5437n@googlegroups.com> <u9hkdf$3v7ff$1@dont-email.me> <4ad9b384-ccea-419e-b634-66da1b61a223n@googlegroups.com> <u9i2c8$4m11$1@dont-email.me>
Message-ID	<b9700a89-bf0a-4940-82bb-3b21ecf808can@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy
From	Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca>

Show all headers | View raw

On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 10:13:33 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
> On 7/22/2023 8:36 PM, Dan Christensen wrote: 
> > On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 6:15:18 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote: 
> > 
> > [snip] 
> > 
> >>>>>>>> "The Moon is made from Green Cheese ⇒ 
> >>>>>>>> Donald Trump is God" 
> >>>>>>>> ================================= 
> >>>>>>>> ============================ 
> >>>>>>>> "Donald Trump is God" 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Once again you left out the part about 
> >>>>>>> the moon NOT being made of green cheese. 
> >>>>>>> Yes, it really does matter! 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> It really does matter. 
> >>>>>> I think how you think it matters 
> >>>>>> is different from how it really matters. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> (if Green-Cheese-Moon then God-Trump) 
> >>>>>> implies (God-Trump) 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Not (Green-Cheese-Moon) 
> >>>>>> ======================================= 
> >>>>>> God-Trump 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Wrong. 
> >>>> If DCProof tells you that's wrong, 
> >>>> then repair DCProof. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> ((C⇒G)⇒G)∧¬C 
> >>>> 
> >>> [snip] 
> >>> 
> >>> I don't know why you are fixating on that oddity. The issue here is is the tautology: ~C => [C => G]. 
> > 
> >> Yet we know that the substance of the Moon has nothing to do with the 
> >> divinity of Trump yet sustain it anyway? 
> >> 
> > [snip] 
> > 
> > You have yet to explain why that is worth any consideration. AFACIT it would only introduce needless complications for no apparent gain.

> So the survival of humanity is not a sufficient reason to transform 
> logic into correct reasoning? 
> 
[snip]

You have yet to explain how the application of classical logic has in any way endangered humanity as you suggest here. You have presented no evidence whatsoever to support your claims. You really must do your homework if you want to be taken seriously. 

Dan

Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

Back to sci.logic | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 17:40 -0500
  Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-20 17:13 -0700
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 19:33 -0500
      Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-20 19:54 -0700
        Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 22:34 -0500
          Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-20 21:53 -0700
            Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 08:47 -0500
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 07:46 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:03 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 08:38 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 11:13 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:18 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:25 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 10:07 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 12:42 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:49 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:59 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy (Gödel and Tarski) are abolished olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 13:37 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy (Gödel and Tarski) are abolished (typos) olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 14:44 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 14:12 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 16:30 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:11 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:12 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 11:46 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:54 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:01 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 12:06 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 10:13 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:26 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:31 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:33 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 10:42 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 13:54 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 15:59 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Daniel Pehoushek <pehoushek1@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 14:09 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 14:24 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 16:42 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 16:44 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 16:45 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 16:50 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 22:15 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 16:54 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 22:41 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-22 08:29 +0200
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-22 08:34 +0200
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 23:43 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 09:44 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 09:50 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 09:04 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 11:23 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 09:30 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 11:37 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 10:34 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 12:49 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 13:07 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 11:19 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 13:28 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 11:52 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 14:19 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 11:07 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 11:28 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 12:26 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 12:50 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 12:59 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-22 15:08 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 13:28 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 15:52 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 14:41 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 16:49 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-22 17:44 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 15:09 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 17:15 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 18:36 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 21:13 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 19:37 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 22:18 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 20:40 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 22:58 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 21:05 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 23:08 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 21:23 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 23:33 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 21:43 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 23:57 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 22:28 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 09:00 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 09:39 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-23 17:22 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 14:47 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 17:19 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-23 15:53 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 18:18 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 20:10 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-23 19:52 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 22:23 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-23 22:17 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:24 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 08:24 -0700
                True(L,x) only requires the Prolog Architecture of reaching Prolog facts through Prolog Rules olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 10:34 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 03:18 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 03:22 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:27 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:35 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 07:42 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 09:46 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 08:46 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 10:50 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 09:08 -0700
                True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 11:15 -0500
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 09:37 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 11:53 -0500
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 10:04 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:16 -0500
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:00 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:15 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:52 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:56 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 13:25 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 19:58 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 22:17 -0500
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 00:19 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 04:04 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 04:20 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 03:58 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 04:08 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 04:24 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-25 09:20 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 11:42 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 14:44 -0500
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 15:54 -0700
                Re: True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 12:52 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 10:05 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-24 12:43 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 11:48 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-24 14:02 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 13:36 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-24 15:20 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 14:45 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-24 17:37 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 16:51 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-24 14:03 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net> - 2023-07-22 23:37 -0400
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-23 15:26 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 17:54 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-24 01:13 +0200
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 16:28 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 16:34 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-23 19:26 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 21:44 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-22 08:11 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-22 17:14 +0200
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 09:07 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 07:59 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 10:26 -0500
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-22 11:04 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 14:39 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 14:42 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 10:28 -0700
        Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 04:09 -0700
          Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 04:11 -0700
            Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 04:16 -0700
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 04:20 -0700
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 09:02 -0500
            Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 06:04 -0700
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 06:16 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 06:17 -0700
                Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-21 06:47 -0700
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-21 08:37 -0500
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 20:31 -0500
  Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 17:18 -0700
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 17:21 -0700
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-20 19:36 -0500
  Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2023-07-24 11:09 +0300
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:12 -0500
    Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 06:59 -0700
      Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 09:05 -0500
        Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 08:32 -0700
          Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 10:38 -0500
            Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Dan Christensen <Dan_Christensen@sympatico.ca> - 2023-07-24 08:50 -0700
              True(L,x) can be defined by the Prolog inference model olcott <polcott2@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 11:09 -0500
              Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2023-07-24 20:57 +0200

csiph-web