- This topic has 1 voice and 0 replies.
-
Posts
-
ProKeymaster
Tautologies
richardhp – ‘Tautologies’
Are any supporters of Pro Theory familiar with the concept of a logical tautology?
Tina – ‘Re: Tautologies’
Pro Theory has been labelled as a tautologous but this only arises from misunderstanding. I’m not sure which aspect of Pro Theory you refer to but in general I would like to respond with the following. We have to get our heads around this construction to fully understand the logic: (p or -p) or -(p) and -(-p).
This is to say: Any proposition has the potential to be either p , or not p, or not p but not, not p either. The proposition: “God Exists” is a good example. Logic demands either G or -G is True but not both…and Pro Theory agrees with this…but differs in its ability to acknowledge the third potential of Neutral Truth Value in regards to :-G and -(-G) = -G + G = 0. That is: It is not the case that G is True because there is no proof. But it is also not the case that -G is True because there is no proof.
Therefore “God Exists” has neutral Truth Value and in this example the true case is indeterminate until G or -G is proved. Pro demonstrates this by: Affirming, negating and neutralizing any statement to show the three potentials of Truth Values. Lastly the three simultaneous potentials of positive, negative and neutral are present in everything (not just truth values).
It is not tautologous to state this fact. In any search for Truth we have to identify which potential is manifest and also acknowledge that the manifest potential can shift at any time. I may say “I exist” and you may deem this True – but by the time you read this – I may ‘not exist’ because I died. Or the neutral potential of “I exist” would be if I were in a coma which would certainly compromise the status of my “existence”.
- The topic ‘Tautologies’ is closed to new replies.
