The point is that in a system such as Fromm's which recognizes unconscious motivations, and which rests on certain ethical absolutes, empirical data can be used to support whatever proposition the writer is urging at the moment.

Old and disused church buildings can be seen as an interesting proposition for developers as the architecture and location often provide for attractive homes or city centre entertainment venues On the other hand, many newer Churches have decided to host meetings in public buildings such as schools, universities, cinemas < ref >

A possible defeater or overriding proposition for such a claim could be a true proposition like, " Tom Grabit's identical twin Sam is currently in the same town as Tom.

Indeed, his famous discussion of the subject is merely a restatement of Arnauld's doctrine that in the proposition " God is omnipotent ", the verb " is " signifies the joining or separating of two concepts such as " God " and " omnipotence ".

Because this geometrical interpretation of multiplication was limited to three dimensions, there was no direct way of interpreting the product of four or more numbers, and Euclid avoided such products, although they are implied, e. g., in the proof of book IX, proposition 20.

However, this proposition is not generally accepted, as T1 has other morphological features, such as an articulating rib, deemed diagnostic of thoracic vertebrae, and because exceptions to the mammalian limit of seven cervical vertebrae are generally characterized by increased neurological anomalies and maladies.

The Institute defines it as the proposition that " certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

" One may introduce arguments for and against this proposition, based upon such things as standards of statistical analysis, the definition of " overweight ," etc.

The series of formulas which is constructed within such a system is called a derivation and the last formula of the series is a theorem, whose derivation may be interpreted as a proof of the truth of the proposition represented by the theorem.

Thus, even though most deduction systems studied in propositional logic are able to deduce, this one is too weak to prove such a proposition.

In mathematics, a lemma ( plural lemmata or lemmas ) from the Greek λῆμμα ( lemma, “ anything which is received, such as a gift, profit, or a bribe ”) is a proven proposition which is used as a stepping stone to a larger result rather than as a statement of interest by itself.

" Most people would consider such an utterance to represent an analytic proposition which is true a priori.

A scientifically minded physicalist may, following Andrew Melnyk, accept the first horn of the dilemma ; that is, a physicalist could live with the idea that the current definition of physicalism may very likely end up being false as long as he believes the proposition is more plausible than any currently formulated rival proposition, such as dualism.

If the only semantic function of a name is to tell us which individual a proposition is about, how can it tell us this when there is no such individual?

An " extensional stance " and restriction to a second-order predicate logic means that a propositional function extended to all individuals such as " All ' x ' are blue " now has to list all of the ' x ' that satisfy ( are true in ) the proposition, listing them in a possibly infinite conjunction: e. g. x < sub > 1 </ sub > V x < sub > 2 </ sub > V.

Those who subscribe to the proposition that there are inherent distinctions among people that can be ascribed to membership in a racial group ( and who may use this to justify differential treatment of such groups ) tend to describe themselves using the term “ racialism ” rather than “ racism ”, to avoid the negative connotations of the latter word.

In the mathematical model, reasoning about such data is done in two-valued predicate logic, meaning there are two possible evaluations for each proposition: either true or false ( and in particular no third value such as unknown, or not applicable, either of which are often associated with the concept of NULL ).

Sometimes a concept can itself be the subject of a proposition, such as in " There are no Albanian philosophers ".

We can communicate such a game of chess in the exact way that Wittgenstein says a proposition represents the world.

A proposition can say something, such as " George is tall ," but it cannot express ( say ) this function of itself.

As a responsible member of the commission we do not accept any such categorical, absolute proposition that whales should not be killed or caught.

:“ If an integer n is greater than 2, then has no solutions in non-zero integers a, b, and c. I have a truly marvelous proof of this proposition which this margin is too narrow to contain .”

If the defendant accepts these suggestions and changes his penalty proposition, the court approves it and passes the verdict according to the plea agreement.

If, however, there is no quantifier, the variable is called free, and the truth-value of the proposition depends on the value of the variable.

If someone thinks the proposition, " There is a tree in the yard ," then that proposition accurately pictures the world if and only if there is a tree in the yard.

If there is no tree in the yard, the proposition does not accurately picture the world.

In response he devised his own anti-razor: " If three things are not enough to verify an affirmative proposition about things, a fourth must be added, and so on.

If the truth of a proposition can be established in more than one way, the corresponding connective has multiple introduction rules.

He said, “ If we accept the proposition that one person can be sacrificed for the happiness of the many, it will soon be demonstrated that two or three or more could also be sacrificed for the happiness of the many.

If no arguments were given to prove this proposition, it would just be a bare assertion.

The reasoning behind existential elimination (∃ E ) is as follows: If it is given that there exists an element for which the proposition function is true, and if a conclusion can be reached by giving that element an arbitrary name, that conclusion is necessarily true, as long as it does not contain the name.

When Achilles demands that " If you accept A and B and C, you must accept Z ," the Tortoise remarks that that's another hypothetical proposition, and suggests even if it accepts C, it could still fail to conclude Z if it did not see the truth of:

For example, substituting propositions in natural language for logical variables, the inverse of the conditional proposition, " If it's raining, then Sam will meet Jack at the movies " is " If it's not raining, then Sam will not meet Jack at the movies.

If X is a domain of x and P ( x ) is a predicate dependent on x, then the universal proposition is expressed in Boolean algebra terms as

If no domain of discourse has been identified, a proposition such as is ambiguous.

If the domain of discourse is the set of real numbers, the proposition is false, with as counterexample ; if the domain is the set of naturals, the proposition is true, since 2 is not the square of any natural number.

If a certain proposition is true, that does not imply that the proposition is logically necessary.

If that original show ( Broadway Open House ) had been done five years later, they may have changed their minds, because they did a lot of the same kind of humor we did later ... Any time a performer dies in the process of doing a television series or a Broadway show, it's a difficult proposition how to proceed in good taste.

" A similar statement was made by Max Planck in 1897, not labeled as a law but as an important proposition: " If a body, A, be in thermal equilibrium with two other bodies, B and C, then B and C are in thermal equilibrium with one another.

If a proposition is deducible from another with respect to all its non-logical parts, it is said to be ' logically deducible '.

It is the inference that if the proposition p is true, and proposition q is true, then the logical conjunction of the two propositions p and q is true.

Thus if a represents Socrates then Phil ( a ) asserts the first proposition, p ; if a instead represents Plato then Phil ( a ) asserts the second proposition, q.

For instance, in Heyting arithmetic, one can prove that for any proposition p which does not contain quantifiers, is a theorem ( where x, y, z ... are the free variables in the proposition p ).

For inherent omniscience one interprets Kxp in this and the following as x can know that p is true, so for inherent omniscience this proposition reads:

Say we wish to disprove proposition p. The procedure is to show that assuming p leads to a logical contradiction.

Say instead we wish to prove proposition p. We can proceed by assuming " not p " ( i. e. that p is false ), and show that it leads to a logical contradiction.

To disprove p: one uses the tautology ( p → ( R ∧ ¬ R )) → ¬ p, where R is any proposition and the ∧ symbol is taken to mean " and ".

To prove p: one uses the tautology (¬ p → ( R ∧ ¬ R )) → p where R is any proposition.

For a simple example of the first kind, consider the proposition, ¬ p: " there is no smallest rational number greater than 0 ".

So we can conclude that the original proposition, ¬ p, must be true — " there is no smallest rational number greater than 0 ".

One knows that p ( p stands for any proposition -- e. g., that the sky is blue ) if and only if p is true, one believes that p is true, and one has arrived at the belief that p through some reliable process.