Ok. I like/understand “affirmative particular”. “i” or “there exists” ∃ = “some” or there exists at least one Existential qualifier: (“∃x” or “∃(x)”) Some X are/is not Y is a logically inconsistent premise. Some X are/is not Y has an absolutely logical existence as a conclusion. If some X are Y, then some Y must definitely be X. The interpretation of the prefix “some, many etc.” will be “AT LEAST ONE”. If some X are Y, it does not imply that some X are then definitely NOT Y.

Ok. I like/understand “affirmative particular”. “i” or “there exists”
∃ = “some” or there exists at least one
Existential qualifier: (“∃x” or “∃(x)”)
 
Some X are/is not Y is a logically inconsistent premise.
Some X are/is not Y has an absolutely logical existence as a conclusion.
 
If some X are Y, then some Y must definitely be X.
The interpretation of the prefix “some, many etc.” will be “AT LEAST ONE”.
If some X are Y, it does not imply that some X are then definitely NOT Y.
Ok, it seemed like the LET expression in programming would be of this kind of thing — and going to the wikipedia page: there it is!
 . The let expression is a conjunction within an existential quantifier.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


4 + two =

Leave a Reply