my journal has gotten really boring. i wouldnt read it anymore. so instead of spouting out the same stupid shit every day, im gonna write all my journal entries on a different topic every week. nothing goes on in my life anyways. if someone dies, or i lose a limb, you'll all be the 5th to know, I promise.
This week, fragmentary philosophical lessons from memory (its been over a year since i've read anything other than the newspaper):
Demorgan's Law
-the statement "Not A and Not B" yields the same truth values as the statement "Neither A nor B."
~A * ~B = ~(A v B) and ~A v ~B = ~(A * B)
this is an important move in logic, when yer all proving theorems and doing yer intellectual masterbation, conjuncts can be separated, while disjuncts cannot. if you know that both A and B are true, then you can separate the two, and use them apart from the statement as a whole. you can't deduce the truth of either A or B, if all you know is A v B. if you want to get A away from B in the statement A v B--if you want to know that which of the two is true (or if both are true)--you have to know more shit. and this is one way to know more shit easier.
(logic is harder to explain in plain text than i thought...ummm...)
so if you knew that the sentence "John is rich and Cindy is rich." is true, you also know that the sentences "John is rich." and "Cindy is rich." are both true, separately. But, if you know that the sentence "Either John or Cindy is rich" is true, you do not know whether the two sentences "John is rich." and "Cindy is rich." are true. All you know is that at least one of the two is true. You cannot know (and therefore use) either part of the disjunct when proving a theorem, or etc etc. The disjunct is just not as useful as the conjunct in formal logic.
And so, using Demorgan's, if we know that "Cindy is not rich." and "John is not rich." are both true sentences, we also know that "Neither John nor Cindy is rich." is also true. If we know that "Either Cindy is not rich, or John is not rich." is a true sentence, we also know that "It is not true that both Cindy and John are rich." is also a true sentence.
Tommorow: ethics and value
(It is not not true that both Helmet and afternoon beers are good.)
This week, fragmentary philosophical lessons from memory (its been over a year since i've read anything other than the newspaper):
Demorgan's Law
-the statement "Not A and Not B" yields the same truth values as the statement "Neither A nor B."
~A * ~B = ~(A v B) and ~A v ~B = ~(A * B)
this is an important move in logic, when yer all proving theorems and doing yer intellectual masterbation, conjuncts can be separated, while disjuncts cannot. if you know that both A and B are true, then you can separate the two, and use them apart from the statement as a whole. you can't deduce the truth of either A or B, if all you know is A v B. if you want to get A away from B in the statement A v B--if you want to know that which of the two is true (or if both are true)--you have to know more shit. and this is one way to know more shit easier.
(logic is harder to explain in plain text than i thought...ummm...)
so if you knew that the sentence "John is rich and Cindy is rich." is true, you also know that the sentences "John is rich." and "Cindy is rich." are both true, separately. But, if you know that the sentence "Either John or Cindy is rich" is true, you do not know whether the two sentences "John is rich." and "Cindy is rich." are true. All you know is that at least one of the two is true. You cannot know (and therefore use) either part of the disjunct when proving a theorem, or etc etc. The disjunct is just not as useful as the conjunct in formal logic.
And so, using Demorgan's, if we know that "Cindy is not rich." and "John is not rich." are both true sentences, we also know that "Neither John nor Cindy is rich." is also true. If we know that "Either Cindy is not rich, or John is not rich." is a true sentence, we also know that "It is not true that both Cindy and John are rich." is also a true sentence.
Tommorow: ethics and value
(It is not not true that both Helmet and afternoon beers are good.)
VIEW 16 of 16 COMMENTS
I like your new favorite sexual position!
I'm getting a new computer this week! You'll have to tell me how to get soulseek or whatever it is you use.
Oh God! I keep forgetting to tell you that you misspelled Hemingway in your list of favorite books/authors.
[Edited on Mar 24, 2004 11:56AM]