|
|
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{otheruses}}
| | BMI check is a rapid strategy to learn when one's physique mass index is inside, over or under the desirable figure. However, the result isn't the measure of one's total health, it's really a guidebook.<br><br><br><br>There is another technique of calculating BMI for girl should you do not wish to convert feet and pounds to meters and kilograms. Take the earlier example of the girl weighing in at 150 pounds. Take the pounds that are 150 plus instances it by four.88 offering we 732, then derive the woman's height in feet squared that is (5.5 occasions 5.5) which is 25.25 feet squared. Then hold on to these two results we simply got. After which, separate the fat by the height squared, in this case it would be (732 split by 25.25) as well as the result is 24.1 that is really close to the earlier metric formula's result. See how simple it is actually with regards to BMI calculations for women!<br><br>In the mid 1800's Belgian scientist Adolphe Quetelet developed the Quetelet index, that is known today because the body mass index (BMI). This statistical measurement compares a person's height plus fat and is a useful tool to find fat difficulties inside a population or for an individual. Though a [http://safedietplans.com/calories-burned-walking calories burned walking] cannot measure the actual percentage of body fat, its ease of calculation makes it a popular diagnostic tool for health experts.<br><br>NLP plus hypnotherapy are excellent tools to help stop anorexia nervosa when as well as for all. They function by altering the patterns of thought from those that are conducive to an anorexic pattern to anything less favorable for anorexia to take hold. This way is further enhanced by using hypnotherapy together with it in order to improve feelings of peace, approval, happy thoughts, and positive eating practices.<br><br>Look at where you're at now plus at a goal for the best of the year. Then break it down into a quantity of little goals. You wish To break the weight reduction journey down into little chunks which appear extra attainable. Focus found on the primary "mini" objective until we reach it and then transfer on to the following 1.<br><br>Measuring a person's waist circumference puts most 'dislikers' of the BMI (see above)at ease considering it allows for a more accurate measurement of a person's body fat. If a muscular individual is rated because overweight on the BMI, measuring their waist circumference could determine when which person is indeed obese.<br><br>Calculating can be mentally completed or through a easy calculator or even by the Internet. With these contemporary times of development, nothing is impossible. The growing awareness of individuals about health moreover paved the way for the creation of calories burned walking calculator Online. This provides any Internet consumer the advantage of just entering the required numbers in the appropriate unit without even recognizing the formula. Getting one's BMI is made effortless with merely a some clicks. One does not even need to wait. Once one clicks found on the compute BMI switch, the BMI quantity comes out instantaneously. |
| {{Refimprove|date=July 2008}}
| |
| [[File:Square of opposition, set diagrams.svg|thumb|This diagram shows the contradictory relationships between [[categorical proposition]]s in the [[square of opposition]] of [[Term logic|Aristotelian logic]].]]
| |
| | |
| In [[classical logic]], a '''contradiction''' consists of a logical incompatibility between two or more [[proposition]]s. It occurs when the propositions, taken together, yield two [[logical consequence|conclusion]]s which form the logical, usually opposite inversions of each other. Illustrating a general tendency in applied logic, [[Aristotle|Aristotle's]] [[law of noncontradiction]] states that "One cannot say of something that it is and that it is not in the same respect and at the same time."
| |
| | |
| By extension, outside of classical logic, one can speak of contradictions between actions when one presumes that their motives contradict each other.
| |
| | |
| ==History==
| |
| By creation of a paradox, [[Plato]]'s ''[[Euthydemus (dialogue)|Euthydemus]]'' dialogue demonstrates the need for the notion of ''contradiction''. In the ensuing dialogue [[Dionysodorus (sophist)|Dionysodorus]] denies the existence of "contradiction", all the while that [[Socrates]] is contradicting him:
| |
| :". . . I in my astonishment said: What do you mean Dionysodorus? I have often heard, and have been amazed to hear, this thesis of yours, which is maintained and employed by the disciples of Protagoras and others before them, and which to me appears to be quite wonderful, and suicidal as well as destructive, and I think that I am most likely to hear the truth about it from you. The dictum is that there is no such thing as a falsehood; a man must either say what is true or say nothing. Is not that your position?"
| |
| Indeed, Dionysodorus agrees that "there is no such thing as false opinion . . . there is no such thing as ignorance" and demands of Socrates to "Refute me." Socrates responds "But how can I refute you, if, as you say, to tell a falsehood is impossible?".<ref>Dialog ''Euthydemus'' from ''The Dialogs of Plato translated by [[Benjamin Jowett]]'' appearing in: BK 7 ''Plato'': [[Robert Maynard Hutchins]], editor in chief, 1952, ''[[Great Books of the Western World]]'', [[Encyclopædia Britannica]], Inc., [[Chicago]].</ref>
| |
| | |
| == Contradiction in formal logic ==
| |
| :Note: The symbol <math>\bot</math> ([[falsum]])<!-- [[falsum]] hyperlink should redirect to the "[[False (logic)]] article... but I like the template I created so I will wait some days before correcting it :O)--> represents an arbitrary contradiction, with the dual [[tee (symbol)|tee]] symbol <math>\top</math> used to denote an arbitrary tautology. Contradiction is sometimes symbolized by "O''pq''", and tautology by "V''pq''". The turnstile symbol, <math>\vdash</math> is often read as "yields" or "proves".
| |
| | |
| In classical logic, particularly in [[propositional logic|propositional]] and [[first-order logic]], a proposition <math>\varphi</math> is a contradiction [[if and only if]] <math>\varphi\vdash\bot</math>. Since for contradictory <math>\varphi</math> it is true that <math>\vdash\varphi\rightarrow\psi</math> for all <math>\psi</math> (because <math>\bot\rightarrow\psi</math>), one may prove any proposition from a set of axioms which contains contradictions. This is called the "[[principle of explosion]]" or "ex falso quodlibet" ("from falsity, whatever you like").
| |
| | |
| In a [[completeness|complete]] logic, a formula is contradictory if and only if it is [[unsatisfiable]].
| |
| | |
| ===Proof by contradiction===
| |
| {{main|Proof by contradiction}}
| |
| For a proposition <math>\varphi</math> it is true that <math>\vdash\varphi</math>, i. e. that <math>\varphi</math> is a [[tautology (logic)|tautology]], i. e. that it is always true, if and only if <math>\neg\varphi \vdash \bot</math>, i. e. if the negation of <math>\varphi</math> is a contradiction. Therefore, a [[proof (logic)|proof]] that <math>\neg\varphi \vdash \bot</math> also proves that <math>\varphi</math> is true. The use of this fact constitutes the technique of the proof by contradiction, which mathematicians use extensively. This applies only in a logic using the excluded middle <math>A\vee\neg A</math> as an axiom.
| |
| | |
| ===Symbolic representation===<!-- This section is linked from [[Barbershop paradox]] -->
| |
| In mathematics, the symbol used to represent a contradiction within a proof varies. [http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/info/symbols/comprehensive/symbols-a4.pdf] Some symbols that may be used to represent a contradiction include ↯, Opq, <math>\Rightarrow \Leftarrow</math>, ⊥, ↮, and ※. It is not uncommon to see [[Q.E.D.]] or some variant immediately after a contradiction symbol; this occurs in a proof by contradiction, to indicate that the original assumption was false and that the theorem must therefore be true.
| |
| | |
| === The notion of contradiction in an axiomatic system and a proof of its consistency ===
| |
| A [[Consistency proof]] requires (i) an [[axiomatic system]] (ii) a demonstration that it is not the case that both the formula ''p'' and its negation ''~p'' can derived in the system. But by whatever method one goes about it, all consistency proofs would ''seem'' to necessitate the primitive notion of ''contradiction''; moreover, it ''seems'' as if this notion would simultaneously have to be "outside" the formal system in the definition of tautology.
| |
| | |
| When [[Emil Post]] in his 1921 ''Introduction to a general theory of elementary propositions'' extended his proof of the consistency of the [[propositional calculus]] (i.e. the logic) beyond that of ''[[Principia Mathematica]]'' (PM) he observed that with respect to a ''generalized'' set of postulates (i.e. axioms) he would no longer be able to automatically invoke the notion of "contradiction" – such a notion might not be contained in the postulates:
| |
| :"The prime requisite of a set of postulates is that it be consistent. Since the ordinary notion of consistency involves that of contradiction, which again involves negation, and since this function does not appear in general as a primitive in [the ''generalized'' set of postulates] a new definition must be given".<ref>Post 1921 ''Introduction to a general theory of elementary propositions'' in van Heijenoort 1967:272.</ref>
| |
| | |
| Post's solution to the problem is described in the demonstration ''An Example of a Successful Absolute Proof of Consistency'' offered by [[Ernest Nagel]] and [[James R. Newman]] in their 1958 ''[[Gödel]]'s Proof''. They too observe a problem with respect to the notion of "contradiction" with its usual "truth values" of "truth" and "falsity". They observe that:
| |
| | |
| :"The property of being a tautology has been defined in notions of truth and falsity. Yet these notions obviously involve a reference to something ''outside'' the formula calculus. Therefore, the procedure mentioned in the text in effect offers an ''interpretation'' of the calculus, by supplying a model for the system. This being so, the authors have not done what they promised, namely, ''''to define a property of formulas in terms of purely structural features of the formulas themselves''''. [Indeed] . . . proofs of consistency which are based on models, and which argue from the truth of axioms to their consistency, merely shift the problem."<ref>boldface italics added, Nagel and Newman:109-110.</ref>
| |
| | |
| Given some "primitive formulas" such as PM's primitives S<sub>1</sub> V S<sub>2</sub> [inclusive OR], ~S (negation) one is forced to define the axioms in terms of these primitive notions. In a thorough manner Post demonstrates in PM, and defines (as do Nagel and Newman, see below), that the property of ''tautologous'' – as yet to be defined – is "inherited": if one begins with a set of tautologous axioms (postulates) and a [[deduction system]] that contains [[substitution (logic)|substitution]] and [[modus ponens]] then a ''consistent'' system will yield only tautologous formulas.
| |
| | |
| So what will be the definition of ''tautologous''?
| |
| | |
| Nagel and Newman create two [[mutually exclusive]] and [[Collectively exhaustive events|exhaustive]] classes K<sub>1</sub> and K<sub>2</sub> into which fall (the outcome of) the axioms when their variables e.g. S<sub>1</sub> and S<sub>2</sub> are assigned from these classes. This also applies to the primitive formulas. For example: "A formula having the form S<sub>1</sub> V S<sub>2</sub> is placed into class K<sub>2</sub> if both S<sub>1</sub> and S<sub>2</sub> are in K<sub>2</sub>; otherwise it is placed in K<sub>1</sub>", and "A formula having the form ~S is placed in K<sub>2</sub>, if S is in K<sub>1</sub>; otherwise it is placed in K<sub>1</sub>".<ref>Nagel and Newman:110-111</ref>
| |
| | |
| Nagel and Newman can now define the notion of ''[[tautology (logic)|tautologous]]'': "a formula is a tautology if, and only if, it falls in the class K<sub>1</sub> no matter in which of the two classes its elements are placed".<ref>Nagel and Newman:111</ref> Now the property of "being tautologous" is described without reference to a model or an interpretation.
| |
| | |
| :For example, given a formula such as ~S<sub>1</sub> V S<sub>2</sub> and an assignment of K<sub>1</sub> to S<sub>1</sub> and K<sub>2</sub> to S<sub>2</sub> one can evaluate the formula and place its outcome in one or the other of the classes. The assignment of K<sub>1</sub> to ~S<sub>1</sub> places ~S<sub>1</sub> in K<sub>2</sub>, and now we can see that our assignment causes the formula to fall into class K<sub>2</sub>. Thus by definition our formula is not a tautology.
| |
| | |
| Post observed that, if the system were inconsistent, a deduction in it (that is, the last formula in a sequence of formulas derived from the tautologies) could ultimately yield S itself. As as an assignment to variable S can come from either class K<sub>1</sub> or K<sub>2</sub>, the deduction violates the inheritance characteristic of tautology, i.e. the derivation must yield an (evaluation of a formula) that will fall into class K<sub>1</sub>. From this, Post was able to derive the following definition of inconsistency ''without the use of the notion of contradiction'':
| |
| :Definition. ''A system will be said to be inconsistent if it yields the assertion of the unmodified variable p [S in the Newman and Nagel examples].''
| |
| | |
| In other words, the notion of "contradiction" can be dispensed when constructing a proof of consistency; what replaces it is the notion of "mutually exclusive and exhaustive" classes. More interestingly,{{Citation needed|date=March 2010}} an axiomatic system need not include the notion of "contradiction".
| |
| | |
| == Contradictions and philosophy ==
| |
| Adherents of the [[epistemology|epistemological]] theory of [[coherentism]] typically claim that as a necessary condition of the justification of a [[belief]], that belief must form a part of a logically non-contradictory (consistent) [[system]] of beliefs. Some [[dialetheism|dialetheists]], including [[Graham Priest]], have argued that coherence may not require consistency.<ref>[http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=bId-cRNUWdAC&dq=contradiction&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=7GWw7Qk_h3&sig=Od0aTst-tCcnbHDbOzpwBHssjEs&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=10&ct=result#PPP1,M1 In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent] By Graham Priest</ref>
| |
| | |
| ===Pragmatic contradictions===
| |
| A pragmatic contradiction occurs when the very statement of the argument contradicts the claims it purports. An inconsistency arises, in this case, because the act of utterance, rather than the content of what is said, undermines its conclusion.<ref>{{cite book | last = Stoljar| first = Daniel| authorlink =| coauthors =| title = Ignorance and Imagination | publisher = Oxford University Press - U.S.| year = 2006| location =| pages = 87| url =| doi =| isbn = 0-19-530658-9}}</ref>
| |
| For examples, arguably, [[Nietzsche]]'s statement that one should not obey others, or [[Moore's paradox]]. Within the analytic tradition, these are seen as [[Self refuting idea|self-refuting statements]] and [[performative contradiction]]s. Other traditions may read them more like [[zen]] [[koan]]s, in which the author purposes makes a contradiction using the traditional meaning, but then implies a new meaning of the word which does not contradict the statement.
| |
| | |
| ===Dialectical materialism===
| |
| | |
| In [[dialectical materialism]], contradiction, as derived by [[Karl Marx]] from [[Hegelianism]], usually refers to an opposition inherently existing within one realm, one unified force or object. This contradiction, as opposed to metaphysical thinking, is not an objectively impossible thing, because these contradicting forces exist in objective reality, not cancelling each other out, but actually defining each other's existence. According to Marxist theory, such a contradiction can be found, for example, in the fact that:<br>
| |
| : (a) enormous wealth and productive powers coexist alongside:
| |
| : (b) extreme poverty and misery;
| |
| : (c) the existence of (a) being contrary to the existence of (b).
| |
| Hegelian and Marxist theory stipulates that the [[Dialectic#Modern philosophy|dialectic]] nature of history will lead to the [[Aufheben|sublation]], or [[Thesis, antithesis, synthesis|synthesis]], of its contradictions. Marx therefore postulated that history would logically make [[capitalism]] evolve into a [[Socialism|socialist society]] where the [[means of production]] would equally serve the [[proletariat|exploited and suffering class]] of society, thus resolving the prior contradiction between (a) and (b).{{citation needed|date=October 2012}}
| |
| | |
| [[On Contradiction (Mao Zedong)|Mao Zedong's philosophical essay]] furthered Marx and Lenin's thesis and suggested that all existence is the result of contradiction.<ref>[http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-1/mswv1_17.htm ON CONTRADICTION]</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==Contradiction outside formal logic==
| |
| [[Image:Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement1.svg|thumb|right|375px|Contradiction on [[Paul Graham (computer programmer)|Graham]]'s Hierarchy of Disagreement]]
| |
| [[Colloquialism|Colloquial usage]] can label actions and/or statements as contradicting each other when due (or perceived as due) to [[presupposition]]s which are contradictory in the logical sense.
| |
| | |
| [[Proof by contradiction]] is used in [[mathematics]] to construct [[Mathematical proof|proofs]].
| |
| | |
| ==See also==
| |
| * [[Contrary (logic)]]
| |
| * [[Doublethink]]
| |
| * [[Irony]]
| |
| * [[Oxymoron]]
| |
| * [[Paraconsistent logic]]
| |
| * [[Paradox]]
| |
| * [[Truth]]
| |
| * [[TRIZ]]
| |
| | |
| ==Footnotes==
| |
| {{Reflist}}
| |
| | |
| ==References==
| |
| * [[Józef Maria Bocheński]] 1960 ''Précis of Mathematical Logic'', translated from the French and German editions by Otto Bird, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, South Holland.
| |
| * Jean van Heijenoort 1967 ''From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic 1879-1931'', Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, ISBN 0-674-32449-8 (pbk.)
| |
| *Ernest Nagel and James R. Newman 1958 ''Gödel's Proof'', New York University Press, Card Catalog Number: 58-5610.
| |
| | |
| ==External links==
| |
| {{Wiktionary|contradiction|although}}
| |
| * {{springer|title=Contradiction (inconsistency)|id=p/c025900}}
| |
| * {{springer|title=Contradiction, law of|id=p/c025910}}
| |
| * {{sep entry|contradiction|Contradiction|[[Laurence R. Horn]]}}
| |
| | |
| {{logic}}
| |
| | |
| [[Category:Propositional calculus]]
| |
| [[Category:Marxist theory]]
| |
| [[Category:Mathematical logic]]
| |
| [[Category:Sentences by type]]
| |
| [[Category:Propositions]]
| |
| [[Category:Immediate inference]]
| |
| [[Category:Cognitive dissonance]]
| |
BMI check is a rapid strategy to learn when one's physique mass index is inside, over or under the desirable figure. However, the result isn't the measure of one's total health, it's really a guidebook.
There is another technique of calculating BMI for girl should you do not wish to convert feet and pounds to meters and kilograms. Take the earlier example of the girl weighing in at 150 pounds. Take the pounds that are 150 plus instances it by four.88 offering we 732, then derive the woman's height in feet squared that is (5.5 occasions 5.5) which is 25.25 feet squared. Then hold on to these two results we simply got. After which, separate the fat by the height squared, in this case it would be (732 split by 25.25) as well as the result is 24.1 that is really close to the earlier metric formula's result. See how simple it is actually with regards to BMI calculations for women!
In the mid 1800's Belgian scientist Adolphe Quetelet developed the Quetelet index, that is known today because the body mass index (BMI). This statistical measurement compares a person's height plus fat and is a useful tool to find fat difficulties inside a population or for an individual. Though a calories burned walking cannot measure the actual percentage of body fat, its ease of calculation makes it a popular diagnostic tool for health experts.
NLP plus hypnotherapy are excellent tools to help stop anorexia nervosa when as well as for all. They function by altering the patterns of thought from those that are conducive to an anorexic pattern to anything less favorable for anorexia to take hold. This way is further enhanced by using hypnotherapy together with it in order to improve feelings of peace, approval, happy thoughts, and positive eating practices.
Look at where you're at now plus at a goal for the best of the year. Then break it down into a quantity of little goals. You wish To break the weight reduction journey down into little chunks which appear extra attainable. Focus found on the primary "mini" objective until we reach it and then transfer on to the following 1.
Measuring a person's waist circumference puts most 'dislikers' of the BMI (see above)at ease considering it allows for a more accurate measurement of a person's body fat. If a muscular individual is rated because overweight on the BMI, measuring their waist circumference could determine when which person is indeed obese.
Calculating can be mentally completed or through a easy calculator or even by the Internet. With these contemporary times of development, nothing is impossible. The growing awareness of individuals about health moreover paved the way for the creation of calories burned walking calculator Online. This provides any Internet consumer the advantage of just entering the required numbers in the appropriate unit without even recognizing the formula. Getting one's BMI is made effortless with merely a some clicks. One does not even need to wait. Once one clicks found on the compute BMI switch, the BMI quantity comes out instantaneously.