Re: some ideas about db rheory

From: vldm10 <>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:06:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>

On Jul 14, 5:37pm, Cimode <> wrote:
> Snipped nonsense
> > Yes, logic is great science, precise and strict. But let me give you
> > two examples, which are on basic level in logic it is about
> > attributes and truth:
> You have *no clue* about what logic *is* or *might be*.
> > 1. One will tell you that lemon is lemon even if its (attribute) color
> > is green.
> An entity and an entity representation (or description) are two
> separate concepts that are to remain unbound in definition purposes.
> Since the intermix between the two concepts is the *premice* of the
> logic used in the beginning of your response to paul, I can only
> *logically* assume that I was right to snip most of it.
> > 2. In some db application about historical persons, you will put (for
> > example) that B. Mussolini had blue eyes. But he had gone from this
> > world before you was born.
> Same as above.

My first example infact is from Hillary Putnam. I suggest you to try as first step some introducing text about his work, and then in next period, try more complex.
My second example is from one of the most important school in logic. Received on Tue Jul 14 2009 - 19:06:59 CEST

Original text of this message