jimpe: logic example

[MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com]

In a message dated 2004-07-31 5:21:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ecartis@digitalkingdom.org writes:


> > Unless I'm completely screwing something up, it's deducing the _negation_ of
> > a
> > premise from the _negation_ of a consequence, which is perfectly valid logic.
> > It's called "modus tollens" or the "rule of the contrapositive".
>
> There's nothing wrong with the logic. The use of "premise" here
> is not standard though. An implication has an antecedent and a
> consequent, a logical argument has premises and conclusion.
>
> In a modus tollens type of argument, one of the premises is an 
> implication and the other premise is the negation of the consequent 
> of that implication. From those two premises, it is valid to 
> conclude the negation of the antecedent of the implication.
>
> mu'o mi'e xorxes

Okay.  It looked funny to me, but I haven't done formal logic in a very long time.  Thanks for taking another look at it.

stevo