from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. Alternative spelling of premise.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. Premise.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. See premise.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- v. take something as preexisting and given
- n. a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn
Sorry, no etymologies found.
The standard terminology today is “cut elimination theorem” All of the logical rules of SC have the subformula property in a very immediate sense: each formula in a premiss is a formula or subformula in the conclusion.
The ranking thought of the have a go at is stated in a solitary punishment called the premiss statement.
The question is begged because definable form is assumed as a premiss, and as a premiss which is to prove definable form.
Since then rational intuition, science, and opinion, and what is revealed by these terms, are the only things that can be ‘true’, it follows that it is opinion that is concerned with that which may be true or false, and can be otherwise: opinion in fact is the grasp of a premiss which is immediate but not necessary.
An argument, then, of this kind is the most incisive, viz. the one that puts its conclusion on all fours with the propositions asked; and second comes the one that argues from premisses, all of which are equally convincing: for this will produce an equal perplexity as to what kind of premiss, of those asked, one should demolish.
Similarly if the premiss which is stated universally is affirmative.
For sometimes men put forward the universal premiss, but do not posit the premiss which is contained in it, either in writing or in discussion: or men put forward the premisses of the principal syllogism, but omit those through which they are inferred, and invite the concession of others to no purpose.
Since, now, in view of these relations the present can never be known exactly, Heisenberg argued, the causality principle as formulated, though logically and not re - futed, must necessarily remain an “empty” statement; for it is not the conclusion, but rather the premiss which is false.
Bother!] "Will you bring some deep objection to a premiss which is fundamental ...."
There are no pure workers; it is not known that any such exist, yet the premiss of the post assumes that some immigrants might be just defined as pure workers, and as incapable of increasing the aggression on those to whom we owe loyalty above the foreigner.