This type of argument is called “proof of contradiction”. You start by supposing x is true. Then you do a bunch of a logic which assumes x is true. If, at the end, you prove something wrong then x is false. Proofs by contradiction are frequently used in mathematics where (compared to morality) it’s easy to ensure your logic remains ironclad.
This type of argument is called “proof of contradiction”. You start by supposing x is true. Then you do a bunch of a logic which assumes x is true. If, at the end, you prove something wrong then x is false. Proofs by contradiction are frequently used in mathematics where (compared to morality) it’s easy to ensure your logic remains ironclad.
I feel like this is something different; X isn’t proven true or false here—we just prove that if X then Y, and then also if ~Y then ~X