# Re: Relation subset operators

From: <cimode_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 09:08:34 -0700 (PDT)

On 6 juin, 17:56, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote:
> cim..._at_hotmail.com wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > Absurd is not necessarily crazy(fou).
>
> > Actually I do respect *absurd* reasonning as a mathematical tool (if
> > you can't prove something is right try to prove that the opposite is
> > wrong)...I just don't believe that a science that does even yet have
> > consensus about how universal quantifiers are defined should even go
> > there.  Not for a second.  In French: Ne pas mettre la charrue avant
> > les boeufs.
>
> Just curious, since everybody seems to be in such a good mood, is there
> a French word for (logically) 'true', other than 'vrai'?, eg., true in
> some formal logic sense.
Well in the army when a proposition/assertion is made to a soldier, that soldier can answer *affirmatif* to validate the assertion or negatif to deny it.

> (If English had no such word, limited, say, to 'real', there'd be no
> stopping the mystics.  Then there is 'faux' which I gather often stands
> for artificial.  I often think neither language has the exact right
> words and think that would put any sensible person in a mood to think
> that the relational 'modal' wouldn't be precisely expressible in either
> one.)
>
> This all reminds me that I've never tried to follow through Codd's
> reduction algorithm nor the later corrections (ie., the  equivalence
> between the calculus and the algebra might be a way to constrain the
> possible interpretations of each individuallly and so avoid the spoken
> language problems .  Does anybody know of a free online source for either?
Formalism is the only way around subjectiveness. I do somehow believe that a formalism that is non universal is not good formalism. As far as the formalism used in RM, I believe that D&D have failed a long time ago onto designing an effective formalism for scrutiny (which does not say anything about the algebra though). In a sense, their body of logical work needs to be reexpressed and reformulated to be more inclusive to larger audiences. Received on Sat Jun 06 2009 - 18:08:34 CEST

Original text of this message