“Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.”
—Avicenna, Medieval Philosopher
This quote is amusing, but it has always made me wonder… if this is a good translation, then did Avicenna really not understand the law of non-contradiction? Because one who denies that p^~p is a contradiction does not necessarily assert that p and ~p are the same.
What does one mean when one denies the truth of ~(p^~p)?
I would guess the person means that this statement is not always true, and thus there exists a p for which this statement is false. Which would mean that there is a p for which p and ~p are simultaneously true.
Of course this doesn’t mean that the person believes that “to be beaten is the same as not to be beaten”, but it’s an amusing quote.
“Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.” —Avicenna, Medieval Philosopher
This quote is amusing, but it has always made me wonder… if this is a good translation, then did Avicenna really not understand the law of non-contradiction? Because one who denies that p^~p is a contradiction does not necessarily assert that p and ~p are the same.
What does one mean when one denies the truth of ~(p^~p)? I would guess the person means that this statement is not always true, and thus there exists a p for which this statement is false. Which would mean that there is a p for which p and ~p are simultaneously true.
Of course this doesn’t mean that the person believes that “to be beaten is the same as not to be beaten”, but it’s an amusing quote.