[FOM] Use of Ex Falso Quodlibet (EFQ) (or ECQ)

[Harvey Friedman]

On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Timothy Y. Chow <tchow at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I like the idea that maybe the debate is just whether Neil Tennant is being
> "revisionary" or not.
>
It appears that Tennant is trying to be revisionary and reassuring at
the same time.

There is a perfectly good proof by my standards that the use of the
usual logic with EFQ yields correct results. This proof seems
difficult to quarrel with, even by Tennant. So if this proof is
accepted, we can *require* that the mathematicians merely quote that
theorem, and then in fact the Journal itself could just put this on
every publication as a rubber stamp. Would that satisfy Tennant's
revisionism?

Harvey