Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy

From	Jim Burns <james.g.burns@att.net>
Newsgroups	sci.logic
Subject	Re: Material implication sustains the non-sequitur fallacy
Date	2023-07-22 17:44 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<d8ba8944-d9e4-1677-264c-e9f2d0d1bec2@att.net> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <u9fsvo$5q61$1@solani.org> <u9ft8v$5q61$2@solani.org> <dbff37bf-226d-4465-8998-ce22d8920284n@googlegroups.com> <14275bae-f018-2e22-7105-78ac64bc1b4c@att.net> <fea769b0-7ae9-4bb5-980d-e1b7226a9113n@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 7/22/2023 4:28 PM, Dan Christensen wrote:
> On Saturday, July 22, 2023
> at 3:08:52 PM UTC-4, Jim Burns wrote:
>> On 7/22/2023 12:04 PM, Dan Christensen wrote:
>>> On Saturday, July 22, 2023
>>> at 2:34:11 AM UTC-4, Mild Shock
>>> (aka Mr. Collapse) wrote:

>>>> olcott, who belives (somehow implicitly):
>>>> "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

(¬(¬C∨G)∨G)∧¬C

((C∧¬G)∨G)∧¬C

((C∨G)∧(¬G∨G))∧¬C

(C∨G)∧¬C

(C∧¬C)∨(G∧¬C)

G∧¬C
====
G
¬C

>>> ALL(a):[a in t => a in s]
>>> & ALL(a):[a in f => a in s]
>>> & ALL(a):[a in m => a in s]
>>> & ALL(a):[a in s => [a in t | a in f | a in m] & ~[a in t & a in f] & ~[a in t & a in m] & ~[a in f & a in m]]
>>
>> That is
>> horrible, no-good, very bad notation.

> The meaning is clear.

Do you know what it is to
damn with faint praise?
You're doing that here, to yourself.

| We went to that new restaurant last night.
|
| How was it?
|
| We all survived.

t ⊆ s  ∧  f ⊆ s  ∧  m ⊆ s  ∧
s ⊆ t∪f∪m  ∧  t∩f = t∩m = f∩m = ∅

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_operators_and_symbols_in_Unicode

If your (DC's) goal with DCProof etc
is to show _how smart you are_
you would look a lot smarter with
less-crappy notation.
Just saying.

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