I equivocated. My bad. What about this, I’ve been reading this logic dude lately, and he’s pretty upset about the little sideways U. He says it only allows us to talk about things in this world. If we want to talk about things in other worlds, then we have to use a box with an arrow, or a diamond with an arrow. I can’t draw them here, but I call them box arrow, and diamond arrow. It’s pretty neat.
I think it’s new. It’s from a thing called “an analysis of counterfactuals”. I can email it to you if you’d like to take a look. Pretty interesting stuff really if you’re into logic. It’s not easy to read, (at least not for me), but it’s worth the effort.
If something, b, is defined to be a sub-set of a larger group,a, and nothing else, then, using that exact definition, is it possible for one to make the claim that “if b, then not a” and still be logically correct?
Also, the following claim was made in this thread:
“when we die the world dies”
What is the logical justification or evidence for this?