- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:23:48 -0600
- To: Graham Klyne <gk-lists@dial.pipex.com>
- 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. Yes, I would accept that rewording. You are right, there are some. Pat Hayes --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2000 17:22:25 UTC