Re: [asa] Science proves there's no need for God?

From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. <>
Date: Sat Oct 11 2008 - 16:28:04 EDT

It finally struck me that you are apparently taking "undefined primitive
term" too seriously and broadly. In Peano's system, 'number', 'successor'
and 'one' are undefined primitives within the axioms, but they are
explicitly chosen to fit number theory. Neither the selection of terms
nor their interrelationships are arbitrary for specific mathematical

Logic is usually accepted as a given. But I recall the late E. John
Lemmon noting that a particular proof in modal logic required
Aristotelian assumptions rather than the usual universal quantifier.
Subalternation is valid in syllogistic, but not in contemporary
functional logics.
Dave (ASA)
Stuck in a dead end job?? Click to start living your dreams by earning an online degree.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Oct 11 16:32:57 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Oct 11 2008 - 16:32:57 EDT