Step 1: Understanding "contrary".
In classical logic, the contrary of a universal affirmative proposition \( (\forall x)Px \) is the universal negative: \[ (\forall x) \sim P(x) \] This asserts that no individual in the domain satisfies \(P(x)\), which is directly contrary to every individual satisfying it.
Step 2: Difference from contradiction.
Note that the contradiction of \( (\forall x)Px \) is \( \sim (\forall x)Px \equiv (\exists x)\sim Px \), but the contrary here is another universal statement: \( (\forall x)\sim Px \), asserting the opposite property universally.
Consider the following argument:
My brother is a real pig. You should see him eat! If he is a pig, then he is not human.
So he is not human.
Which one of the following evaluations about the argument is true?
Which among the following statement(s) is/are compatible with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s position on ‘private language’ in his Philosophical Investigations?
Consider the following argument:
My brother is a real pig. You should see him eat! If he is a pig, then he is not human.
So he is not human.
Which one of the following evaluations about the argument is true?
Which among the following statement(s) is/are compatible with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s position on ‘private language’ in his Philosophical Investigations?