Originally posted by lemon lime
[b]This is because If I said “X is true and therefore Y is true” then this implies “Y is true BECAUSE X is true”
No, "X is true and therefore Y is true" implies X=Y.
If X=T and Y=T then X=Y.
And if my original statement on this topic was a point about semantics and not about logic, then ignoring my point about semantics causes all of your reasoning to fall into the nearest black hole (where the sun don't shine).[/b]
No, "X is true and therefore Y is true" implies X=Y.
NONSENSE! Let X = “all cats can run” and Y = “my cat has teeth”
then
“all cats have teeth” is true and therefore “my cat has teeth” is true
BUT, that does NOT mean that “all cats have teeth” = “my cat has teeth” !!!
what if my cat has teeth but there is another cat that has no teeth? then we have
X = false
and
Y = true
but then you cannot have X = Y without contradiction!
So, OBVIOUSLY “my cat has teeth” does NOT equate with “all cats have teeth” !
If “all cats have teeth” = “my cat has teeth”
then you should be able to swap X and Y around in ““all cats have teeth” is true and therefore “my cat has teeth” is true” so to give:
“my cat has teeth” is true and therefore “all cats have teeth” is true
-but this above is NOT true because one does NOT logically follow from the other!
So you make yet another logical error, this time for my new assertion that you said was false but is true i.e. this still stands:
If I said “X is true and therefore Y is true” then this implies “Y is true BECAUSE X is true”
(note if Y is true and “Y is true BECAUSE X is true” then this still does not exclude the possibility that Y can also be true for other reasons other than merely because X being true)
Also, my earlier statement still stands which was:
a statement can never be both illogical and true