RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2120Goal: $3500

Talk:Tautology

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The third 'See also" is deliberate?

As an example of a non-tautology (& for want of a better home) - the term glottal stop is non-referential.

82.44.143.26 (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

"The third 'See also" is deliberate?" Good gOD! Is it? My word, whatever next? 14:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC) SusanG Toast

Being pseud(o) ironic.

To be self-referential it would be pronounced glo'al stop.

82.44.143.26 (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

"Technically speaking, every mathematical statement is a tautology"[edit]

Technically speaking, every mathematical statement is a tautology? That doesn't seem... accurate. Mathematics certainly allows for predicates, and conditional truth. Every step of a proof is an implication that is not necessarily bidirectional. Godel certainly seemed to make a pretty good case that no mathematical system can be innately tautological. I'm not sure if this is a good statement to make? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 18:35, 5 July 2018 (UTC)