Timeline for Is equality necessarily transitive?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29 at 19:42 | comment | added | Annika | @JoWehler -- correct, I was giving this as an example of a concept where I thought the OP's idea of "non-transitive equality" could apply. | |
| Jun 29 at 18:08 | comment | added | David Gudeman | I don't recommend putting any effort into understanding his post. From experience, I can tell you that such effort will not be rewarded. Still, this is a very good answer to a different question; it's a shame that it won't get you the upvotes you deserve. | |
| Jun 29 at 17:53 | comment | added | Jo Wehler | @Annika You give an interesting example from biology. But it does not show that "equality" violates transitivity - of course not. It shows that the relation "mating with fertile offspring" violates transitivity. There are many similar, non-transitive relations, e.g., "is friend of" or "to be acquainted with so.". | |
| Jun 29 at 17:47 | comment | added | Annika | @DavidGudeman ah, ok -- I think I got lost a bit there in the formalism. | |
| Jun 29 at 17:34 | comment | added | David Gudeman | While this is an interesting suggestion, it isn't relevant to the question, which is motivated by the inconsistent notion of an "arbitrary constant" that is equal to everything. | |
| Jun 29 at 17:33 | comment | added | J D | +1 " Without transitivity I fail to see how equality has retains its usual meaning. " | |
| Jun 29 at 17:17 | history | answered | Annika | CC BY-SA 4.0 |