MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
> Wouldn't it
> make much more sense to just say that, since water can't talk, then
> the statement that you're a banana if water can talk isn't saying
> you're a banana? Can it be true or false to not say that you're a
> banana? The statement would be true if it said that you aren't a banana.
> But it doesn't. It merely doesn't say that you are one.
The statement "I am a banana or I am not" is true. The statement "1+1=2"
is true. Such statements are tautologies, and tell us nothing we didn't
already know. They are still true. They are probably the most
We even use this in normal speech. "If he's a lawyer, then I'm the
Pope's second cousin". "If Blackpool win, I'll eat my hat". Both true if
he isn't a lawyer, and blackpool doesn't win. (both probably false if
they do).
> Now we're talking about conventions of logicians & mathematicians.
> But conventions aren't the same as facts.
If you say Pij, then you're using mathematical terminology.
If you say Pt|ij, as Richard did, then you're using mathematical
terminology for conditional probabilities, and as such have to be using
the mathematical definition of 'if'.
If you use large numbers of such symbols, and then go on to talk about
differentials and worse, the probability that you're talking in
mathspeak is pretty darn close to one.
