Timeline for Why don't we have consensus in more complicated areas of logic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2014 at 18:44 | comment | added | Mauro ALLEGRANZA | @user107986 - No; see my answer in this post : what all constructivists share is the rejection of the method of existence proof "by contradiction": if we want to show that a number with a certain property P exists, we have "to show" a number n such that P(n). We ara not licensed to assert that a number with a property P exists, only when we have derived a contradiction from the assumption that such a number does not exists. | |
| Apr 26, 2014 at 7:20 | comment | added | user107986 | "Prove by contradiction was designed for VERY well prepared sets of information where the total combinations can be clearly seen and exclude each other." Then what about very simple proofs using the law of excluded middle like Euclid's theorem? Do constructivists accept it? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclid's_theorem#Euclid.27s_proof | |
| Apr 25, 2014 at 23:16 | history | answered | Asphir Dom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |