Framedragger: !#s paraconsistent

Framedragger: also, i wonder what you'd make of paraconsistent logic and if you'd like to write an article on it at some future point

Framedragger: (what's nice with these paraconsistent systems is that they may not crumble down when encountering some or other kind of logical paradox.) </weird-rant>

Framedragger: (in paraconsistent systems, they try to "contain" cases when `p && ~p`. normally by principle of explosion you can prove anything (`1. p. 2. p || q [from 1, disjunctive addition.] 3. ~p [given.] 4. q [from 2. and 3.]`). these systems remove one or another inference rule (e.g. that p || q may follow from p, or double negation, or something else), or *suspend* it, in the fashion that some equations may have complex numbers as intermediary

Framedragger: alsoalso, graham priest's paraconsistent logic is an interesting thing.