- From: Graham Klyne <gk-lists@dial.pipex.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 18:38:36 +0000
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
At 01:34 PM 11/26/00 -0600, pat hayes wrote: >Oh yes it does. It arises if we allow disjunctions (which are logically >equivalent to implications, as Im sure you know) and negations; it arises, >in fact, whenever it is possible to express any kind of contradiction. The >only way to avoid it is to make it impossible for anyone to ever disagree >with anyone else, by for example only allowing positive logic (no >negations.) The problem with logics this weak is that it is very difficult >to draw useful conclusions in them. I've been cogitating a little about a related issue. Would you accept a rewording of the final sentence above: The problem with logics this weak is that they are very limited in the range of useful conclusions that can be drawn. ? I think there are _some_ useful conclusions to be drawn from logics without negation, etc. #g ------------------------------------------------------------ Graham Klyne Content Technologies Ltd. Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com> <Graham.Klyne@mimesweeper.com> ------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2000 16:07:47 UTC