|
|
On 30 Oct 2006 19:50:42 -0800, "Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
>Lester Zick wrote:
>> It doesn't? My mistake. So there's "no least real"
>
>There's no least real.
>
>> but a "least integer real"?
>
>There's no least integer.
>
>There's a least POSITIVE integer. Is there some reason you
>keep ignoring the critical word POSITIVE?
I don't ignore it. I considered it as understood but even if you
include it above such that you have "there is a positive least
integer" and "there is no positive least real" you're still stuck with
the implication that there is a distinction between integers and
reals.
>> Hmmm. Curiouser and curiouser.
>
>Not at all, when you distinguish between propositions that
>include that p-word and those that don't.
~v~~
|
|