DeletedUser
So, I remember reading in my philosophy book about the nature of proof. I skipped it, thinking "I'll read it later" - obviously not because I'm a slacker - and so I thought, "hey, I'll just ask about what you think of the nature of proof in the debate hall".
I guess whatever the nature of proof is, it would need to logically lead to a solution for a proof problem. For example; "An apple is placed on a table you are sitting at in an otherwise empty and isolated room. Prove the apple exists."
Seems pretty hard.
I guess whatever the nature of proof is, it would need to logically lead to a solution for a proof problem. For example; "An apple is placed on a table you are sitting at in an otherwise empty and isolated room. Prove the apple exists."
Seems pretty hard.