No. I am stating that the set "Socrates" and the set "man" are not the same. Socrates was A man. Socrates does not define the term man. Socrates is a member of the set Man. In defining the term "man," Socrates is necessary, but not sufficient. To equate them means that one is completely defined by the other, with nothing needing to be added or removed. That is not the case.
;^)
Yeah that was my point too but if Socrates is part of the group man than Socrates=Man is true. Just as Tom Brady is a member of the team Patriots therefore Tom Brady=Patriots is true but Patriots=Tom Brady is an example of the logic flaw of equivocation.
In defining the term "man," Socrates is necessary, but not sufficient.
The example was not trying to define the term "Man", that is why the logic man=Socrates is faulty (not always true). You are learning Grasshopper.
To equate them means that one is completely defined by the other, with nothing needing to be added or removed. That is not the case.
Bingo. Therefore Firmware=Software is true (Firmware is a member of the set Software) but Software=Firmware is false because 1. The set of software is not being defined 2. being a member of the set does not mean it is the only member of the set.
Therefore:
Socrates = man is true and was true his entire life.
but
Man = Socrates is not always true (therefore false)
Put another way: Socrates was a man but not the only man OR firmware is a type of software but not the only type of software.
Thank you for exposing the logic flaws in the following statement:
Petronski (msg #424): If you say firmware=software than that also means software=firmware