**From:** brannen (*brannen@lookingglass.net*)

**Date:** Fri May 27 2005 - 23:57:38 MDT

**Next message:**Daniel Radetsky: "Re: Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Previous message:**Marc Geddes: "Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**In reply to:**Marc Geddes: "Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Next in thread:**Daniel Radetsky: "Re: Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Somebody wrote:

*>>Here's an example, then. Let's suppose we know that
*

*>>A, and we know that A->B. This can also be written as:
*

*>>
*

*>>P(A) = 1 and P(B | A) = 1
*

*>>
*

*>>So using deductive reasoning:
*

*>>
*

*>>A
*

*>>A -> B
*

*>>-------
*

*>>B
*

*>>
*

The normal definition of Material Implication is:

A B A -> B

1 1 1

1 0 0

0 1 1

0 0 1

(See any introductory work on Logic)

What was said in the original post was:

B =! A ; where '=!' symbolizes Identity Equality (as I don't have

the symbol

available.)

Andy

**Next message:**Daniel Radetsky: "Re: Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Previous message:**Marc Geddes: "Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**In reply to:**Marc Geddes: "Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Next in thread:**Daniel Radetsky: "Re: Bayesian epistemology versus Geddesian epistemology"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5
: Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:51 MDT
*