Law of Noncontradiction
In summary:It is false that both P and (not P) are true.
Law of excluded middle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In summary: P or (not P) is true.
It has come up in a few discussions that the Law of NonContradiction has been violated in many case.
Some thing is both "a pile of stuff" and "not a pile of stuff" a pile of stuff depending on how you look at it.
Shcrodinger's cat is both "alive" and "not alive" depending on how you measure it.
Luke-Warm water is both "hot" and "not hot" in some ways.
But a little thought shows that all of these example truly fall short of violating the Law of Noncontradiction.
The problem here is the selection of words used, not a matter of logic.
The logically consistent picture will show that the word usage that we created is self-contradictory, and what we have created in reality is a violation of The Excluded Middle--an expected outcome of the use of clumsy concepts.
What I mean by this is that the actual truth is:
It is neither "a pile of stuff" nor "not a pile of stuff" (a violation of the excluded middle). Instead, the notion of "pile of stuff" is a logically inconsistant notion.
The cat is neither "alive" nor is it "not alive" (again a violation of the Excluded Middle), but rather is a "superposition" of states of "alive" and "not alive."
The water is neither "hot" nor is it "not hot," (another violation of the Exluded Middle), it is simply luke-warm.
Any thoughts on my above statements?