Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: longshadow
You made an implicit assumption (which happens to not be true) in your argument.

Yes, I'm assuming that no circle is a square, and therefore a circle is a "not-square", and vice versa. Perhaps it's because I've led a sheltered Euclidian life, but I believe that assumption to be true.

787 posted on 05/23/2002 9:26:52 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 785 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry
I'm assuming that no circle is a square, and therefore a circle is a "not-square", and vice versa. Perhaps it's because I've led a sheltered Euclidian life, but I believe that assumption to be true.

Yes; you've made that assumption, but Mathematics isn't done on assumptions alone; it relies on definitions, axioms, and proven theorems (and a few Postulates, but those are stipulated as being deniable.)

I think your on the right track, though. Examine your premises, Grasshopper...... there might be an exception.

820 posted on 05/23/2002 2:00:24 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 787 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson