<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Objectively True &#187; logic</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.objectivelytrue.com/tag/logic/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.objectivelytrue.com</link>
	<description>forcibly extracting meaning from everything (syncretically)</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:05:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Is there a little paradox here?</title>
		<link>http://www.objectivelytrue.com/philosophy/2009/10/15/is-there-a-little-paradox-here/</link>
		<comments>http://www.objectivelytrue.com/philosophy/2009/10/15/is-there-a-little-paradox-here/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:53:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jackson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[induction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paradox]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.objectivelytrue.com/?p=297</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mull briefly on this claim: Any argument which stems ultimately from induction, because it is based on generalizing from a limited observation rather than from the whole set of data, cannot be verified to be true. Is it self-referencing, self-refuting, defensible, or something else?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mull briefly on this claim:</p>
<blockquote><p>Any argument which stems ultimately from induction, because it is based on generalizing from a limited observation rather than from the whole set of data, cannot be verified to be true.</p></blockquote>
<p>Is it self-referencing, self-refuting, defensible, or something else?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.objectivelytrue.com/philosophy/2009/10/15/is-there-a-little-paradox-here/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
