Quote:
Originally Posted by hcap
In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.
The same sense requires that the laws governing both the sub atomic and Macroscopic realms to operate in the same way (sense). They do not.
|
The problem with that lame definition is that it is is vague in that it uses the term "contradictory"
and doesn't tell us what actually constitutes a contradiction. And you obviously don't know what a contradiction is either.
The far better (because it's very specific!) definition is how I have expressed it most of the time:
A THING cannot exist and not exist at the same time and in the same sense.
Or another very good way to express the law very specifically is:
A cannot be non-A at the same time and in the same sense.
So, we can see immediately that you are talking about TWO (2) different things. You are talking about sub-atomic and macroscopic realms. And that, sir, is more than one thing! You are, again, comparing apples with oranges. (What else is new!?) The "same sense" requires only that a THING -- ONE thing is required to be understood in one sense and not in another. But you're attempting to bastardize the Law by saying that multiple things need to be understood in one sense only. You even used the term "realms" to denote multiple realms!
For crying out loud, Hcap, Google the Law and learn how it's used and what constitutes a bona fide contradiction and what doesn't! Study numerous examples of both!
Both you and your bud Actor need remedial courses in K-level logic! Not surprising since you especially cannot understand the difference between logical and chronological order!
Permit to give you a bona fide example of when A THING is not contradictory. I'll present an example that I asked Actor about but he was unable to reply because his great brain couldn't figure out what "sense" means. But here's the example, which I presented in question form to him.
My statement:
Diane is my mother and is not my mother.. I asked Actor if this was
necessarily a contradiction. It obviously is not! Why? Because Diane could be my mother in one sense and might not be my mother in another sense! And if you didn't have your thick skull so full of mush, I'd let you wrestle with this and try to figure this out for yourself, but I think I'm going to be compassionate and explain it to you explicitly, so that your entire weekend isn't ruined. Diane could be my foster mother (legal sense) AND not my natural mother (biological sense). Since there are two different senses involved, there is no contradiction.
