🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Sep10.174435.21317@guinness.idbsu.edu>, holmes@opal.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes) writes:

|> St. Augustine does not refer directly to the existence of the set of
|> natural numbers, but refer to the last paragraph of the quote, which
|> you did not include, where he points out that the infinity of natural
|> numbers is "finite" to God.  This certainly seems to support the
|> existence of "omega".

So you don't have the Latin either ...  (I looked last night and
couldn't find it -- not that I could read it, but someone in the
family can.)  Well, I didn't include the last paragraph because I
thought it made your case look stronger -- pretty sleazy technique,
perhaps, but I think we are dealing with slimy inferences here.

As my wife pointed out to me, Augustine was quite a Platonist
himself -- so what can you expect?  Luckily by the 14th century
they had seen the light.  We can regard Augustine's views on these
matters as errors that were corrected by the likes of Ockham and
Buridan.  (Well, some of us can, anyway.)
-- 
Gary H. Merrill  [Principal Systems Developer, C Compiler Development]
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / (919) 677-8000
sasghm@theseus.unx.sas.com ... !mcnc!sas!sasghm