TESTIMONY (P AND CONTINGENCY) by Robert Danis What I like most about your writin

TESTIMONY (P AND CONTINGENCY)

by Robert Danis

What I like most about your writings for P is that your breaking it down into the smallest possible component. Most people try to take a something as a whole and you can’t – you have to break it down into components.

===IMPORTANT==

Continuous recursive disambiguation

Convert all speech to transactions stated in a series of subjectively (humanly) testable operations.

Meaning: first causes. 😉

And as first causes, there are no contingent premises.

And as non-contingent P is closed to deception by suggestion that is dependent upon ambiguity and contingency.

This is why P defeats set logic – which is forever contingent.