I’m not convinced that “logically derivable” is a reasonable definition of “implicit”, and I feel that the proof hinges on this in order to apply standard rules of logic to natural language statements.
And even replacing “implicit” with “logically derivable” might demand that we embed logic in natural language and point to that embedding with the phrase “logically derivable” in order to make the proof go through. Less mathematically/philosophically trained people might understand “logically derivable” to mean something quite different.
I’m not convinced that “logically derivable” is a reasonable definition of “implicit”, and I feel that the proof hinges on this in order to apply standard rules of logic to natural language statements.
And even replacing “implicit” with “logically derivable” might demand that we embed logic in natural language and point to that embedding with the phrase “logically derivable” in order to make the proof go through. Less mathematically/philosophically trained people might understand “logically derivable” to mean something quite different.