Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ]

Subject	Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ]
Newsgroups	comp.theory
References	(11 earlier) <f3cb84cb-d900-4e36-9b6e-b9a38f7903b6n@googlegroups.com> <FJWdnamuhYGbT-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1c9654bd-24ba-44a7-96b7-c017705f5135n@googlegroups.com> <WvqdnXceCIt_RuP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <22966bf6-4f99-4437-954d-be967cf5116en@googlegroups.com>
From	Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org>
Message-ID	<JpBfK.4915$cQO2.3377@fx47.iad> (permalink)
Organization	Forte - www.forteinc.com
Date	2022-05-13 18:59 -0400

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/13/22 6:35 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 6:30:02 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 5:21 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 5:47:57 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2022 4:22 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 5:17:58 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 4:16 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 5:10:21 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 3:57 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:32:49 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 3:23 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:19:26 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 3:08 PM, Dennis Bush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, May 13, 2022 at 4:04:48 PM UTC-4, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:16 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> olcott <No...@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Validity and Soundness*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Good plan. You've run aground as far as halting is concerned, so you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better find another topic you don't know about.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this input
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually specifies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is dead obvious to everyone (except you) that H(P,P) == 0 is incorrect because the actual behavior that the input actually specifies is, by the definition of the problem, P(P).
>>>>>>>>>>>> That is easily shown to be factually incorrect
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Definitions can't be incorrect. They just "are".
>>>>>>>>>> No two contradictory definitions in the same system can both be correct.
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the basis of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> correct simulation of the input to H(P,P) compared to the direct
>>>>>>>>>>>> execution of P(P).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> False, as has been explained many times.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They have empirically proven entirely different
>>>>>>>>>>>> sequences of configurations.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Which is just a fancy way of describing how H manages to get the wrong answer.
>>>>>>>>>> That H(P,P) does correctly decide the halt status that its input
>>>>>>>>>> specifies make H(P,P)== 0 necessarily correct.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That is does not specify the halt status that you expect makes your
>>>>>>>>>> expectation incorrect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I have no time for people that very persistently insist on ignoring the
>>>>>>>>>>>> easily verifiable facts.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So no time for yourself?
>>>>>>>>>> H(P,P)==0 is proven to be correct empirically in that it does correctly
>>>>>>>>>> decide the halt status that its input specifies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The input, by definition, specifies P(P).
>>>>>>>> That is the same as defining the cat in your living room to be a dog.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you're saying the requirement can't be met?
>>>>>> I am saying that no matter how hard you try to make believe that the cat
>>>>>> in your living room is a dog, it is still a cat.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing but more bad analogies with no explanation, which means you're unable to explain why I'm wrong, and that you therefore implicitly agree that I'm correct.
>>>> Tarski makes a similar mistake when he concludes that True() is not a
>>>> definable predicate entirely on the basis that he cannot prove that the
>>>> liar paradox is true. It never occurred to him that the liar paradox is
>>>> simply untrue.
>>>>
>>>> That the definition of the halting problem criteria (in some rare cases)
>>>> directly contradicts the definition of a computer science decider that
>>>> requires all deciders to compute the mapping from their inputs
>>>> conclusively proves that the definition of the halting problem criteria
>>>> is incorrect in these (previously undiscovered) rare cases.
>>>
>>> There is no contradiction regarding the definition of a decider. From your preferred definition:
>>>
>>>> The term decider doesn't really have a standard meaning
>>>
>> Same post same author:
>>
>> How is this definition? Deciders compute the mapping from their inputs
>> to an accept or reject state. – Feb 19 at 17:55
>>
>> This is the standard definition. – Yuval Filmus Feb 19 at 17:56
>>> Even then, there's nothing that says an input can't represent something else as implementation detail of what can actually be passed.
>> Then it is no longer a computation AKA a pure function of its inputs.
> 
> It absolutely is.  Those string inputs map 1-to-1 with a turning machine as per the definition of a halt determiner.
> 
> I also see that you deceptively removed the definition of a halt determiner and the description of how that fixes the proofs, so let me put that back:
> 
> Determiner : A determiner maps its inputs to an accept or reject state based on the properties of non-inputs which the inputs represent as defined by a give problem statement
> 
> So the halting problem is not actually talking about a halt *decider* but a halt *determiner*, as the latter allows strings to represent turing machines. So the proofs can be corrected by changing all references of "halt decider" to "halt determiner".
> 
> So the halting problem actually states:
> 
> A halt determiner is a turing machine H such that for any <M> which is a representation of a turing machine and w which is the input to that turing machine:
> H applied to <M> w reports halting if and only if M applied to w halts, and
> H applied to <M> w reports non-halting if and only if M applied to w does not halt
> 
> So the problem still exists. Nothing else about the proof has changed. We've just corrected the terminology of what H is. And the proof is not refuted
> 
> This also means that your H, which is a halt *decider*, has no bearing on the halting problem, since you usefully pointed out that the halting problem deals with halt determiners and not halt deciders.
> 

And, actually we don't need to play with this nomenclature, as the 
actual statement is can we create a TURING MACHINE, that computes the 
result, the problem doesn't state it needs to be 'a decider'.

Now, that machine doesn't actually need to be an actual 'Decider' as 
defined in Computation Theory, as the REAL definition for a decider is a 
Turing Machine that halts for all inputs (and as a consequence creates a 
mapping from input tape to output tape + Halt State. The Turing Machine 
looked at from the halting problem doesn't need to halt for ALL inputs, 
only all input that represent a Turing Machine applied to an input, so 
an input that doesn't actually represent that can generate a non-halting 
result.

We use the term Halt Decider, because if we CAN find such a machine, 
then it will (basically) fit the definiton of a Halt Decider, as a 
machine that computes the mapping of the input tape (which represents 
the computation to be decided on) to an output (which indicates if that 
computation would halt or run forever). This matches the definition that 
an XX decider computes the mapping of the XX function. This is an 
important piece that PO omits from his definition, that to be a 
SOMETHING decider, your mapping needs to match the SOMETHING function, 
he is just claiming it compute SOME function, not the RIGHT function.

Thread

Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 12:20 -0500
  Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 13:47 -0400
    Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 13:10 -0500
      Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 15:13 -0400
        Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 14:43 -0500
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 16:43 -0400
            Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:56 -0500
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 17:30 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:53 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 18:14 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 17:23 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 19:14 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 18:20 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 20:15 -0400
    Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Jeff Barnett <jbb@notatt.com> - 2022-05-13 14:44 -0600
  Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-13 12:28 -0600
    Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 13:50 -0500
      Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-13 13:00 -0600
        Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 14:11 -0500
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-13 13:20 -0600
            Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 14:51 -0500
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2022-05-13 14:02 -0600
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:08 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 17:56 -0400
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 16:03 -0400
            Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:14 -0500
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 17:39 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:56 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 18:19 -0400
        Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-13 20:15 +0100
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 14:58 -0500
  Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-13 20:16 +0100
    Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:04 -0500
      Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 13:08 -0700
        Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:19 -0500
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 13:23 -0700
            Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 15:32 -0500
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 13:57 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ very foolish ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:10 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ very foolish ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 14:16 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ very foolish ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:17 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ very foolish ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 14:22 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:47 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 15:21 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 17:29 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 15:35 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 18:59 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 18:01 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 16:16 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 18:23 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Tarski made the same mistake ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 16:37 -0700
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 17:44 -0400
      Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-13 21:46 +0100
        Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 16:05 -0500
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 17:47 -0400
          Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-14 00:01 +0100
            Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 18:05 -0500
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 19:22 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ philosophical underpinnings ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 18:35 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ philosophical underpinnings ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 20:27 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ philosophical underpinnings ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 23:01 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ philosophical underpinnings ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 09:42 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 09:42 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 10:59 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 10:32 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 12:42 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 12:25 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 16:18 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 16:02 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 17:15 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 16:48 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 18:50 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 18:21 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 19:52 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 23:07 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-15 07:16 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-17 22:11 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 07:28 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-18 10:01 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ Wittgenstein and I ]( Prolog backchaining ) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 19:57 -0400
              Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-14 00:48 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 19:04 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-14 01:30 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 22:34 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Dennis Bush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2022-05-13 20:58 -0700
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-13 23:15 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 09:47 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-14 09:07 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 09:00 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 10:31 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 09:53 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 11:33 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 11:52 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 17:28 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 16:53 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 18:56 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 18:33 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ computer science is inconsistent ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-14 19:53 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-15 00:20 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-14 18:25 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-15 13:18 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-17 22:02 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 08:27 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-18 10:37 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 19:09 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-18 18:35 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 20:02 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-18 16:20 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-18 10:25 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 19:11 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> - 2022-05-18 18:38 -0500
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-18 20:06 -0400
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-05-19 02:01 +0100
                Re: Correcting logic to make it a system of correct reasoning [ previously undiscovered rare cases ] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2022-05-13 20:31 -0400

csiph-web