Thank you for a clear intro to PCR axioms (I couldn't get it from David R's
posts):
(1) Any statement is either falsifiable or it's either a "tautology" or an
"axiom".
(2) Falsifiable statements are useful, tautologies and axioms are not.
(3) A falsifiable statement (A) cannot be a tautology or an axiom (B) at the
same time. In other words A=A.
(I flexibly change my mind: I want to become the Ayn Rand of PCR).
Seriously. Can we prove *anything* without axioms? Isn't a proof by
definition something like: "If a then b". The first "a" (the "pra-a") must
be assumed. The other option is to follow an authority (like Popper) and
believe that "no-axiom" logic is possible.
Regards, Tadeusz (Tad) Niwinski from planet TeTa
tad@teta.ai http://www.teta.ai (604) 985-4159