home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!uqcspe!cs.uq.oz.au!brendan
- From: brendan@cs.uq.oz.au (Brendan Mahony)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Life at conception...
- Message-ID: <9812@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
- Date: 14 Aug 92 02:51:42 GMT
- References: <1992Aug12.214730.14136@watson.ibm.com>
- Sender: news@cs.uq.oz.au
- Reply-To: brendan@cs.uq.oz.au
- Lines: 30
-
-
- In <1992Aug12.194144.28416@csus.edu> chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) writes:
- |>
- |> P = privacy
- |> A = invalidation of parental consent abortion laws
- |> S = legal consentual sex between adults & minors.
- |>
- |> The judge ruled:
- |>
- |> (P->A) -> (P->S)
- |>
- |> I know this will mean a big discussion over logic,
-
- In <1992Aug12.214730.14136@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis) writes:
- >You claim that the above proves that A -> S, and you call that logical?
-
- I think that the tautogy aluded to is:
-
- (P -> A) -> (P -> S)
- <->
- P -> (A -> S)
-
- As to whether classical proposition logic is applicable? I think that
- the jury is still out on that one.
-
- --
- When soldiers form lines or hollow squares, you call it reason.
- When wild geese in flight take the form of a letter V, you say instinct.
- When the homogeneous atoms of a mineral arrange themselves into shapes
- mathematically perfect you have nothing to say. You have not even invented a name to conceal your heroic unreason."
-