Talk:Probatio diabolica

To User:P-P-P

 * Why did you explain nothing about your vandalistic revert? --Rocky7 04:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you a member of evil VANK? --Rocky7 04:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Why can you think your vandalistic revert is a minor edit? --Rocky7 04:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The meaning of Probatio diabolica cannot be "devil's proof".

 * "diabolica(L)" ← "diabolicus(L)" means "delvish" at most, not "devil's".
 * "daibolica(L)" means "extremely evil or cruel; expressive of cruelty or befitting hell".
 * "devil's" is represented by "diabola(L)" (← diabolus(L)) in this case.
 * "diabolus(L)" means "devil" itselef, therefore, "diabola(L)" means "devil's".
 * "diabolicus(L)" means "extreme evil or cruelty", but doesn't mean "devil" itself.
 * "diabolica(L)" means "extremely evil ot cruel".
 * "probātiō(L), probātiōn(L)" means "trial process, trial period, or test".
 * "proof" ← "prove" is represented by "probāre(L)", not by "probātiō(L), probātiōn(L)".

See the each explanation of Latin origin:
 * Probation
 * Proof
 * diabolic
 * devil

--Rocky7 05:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Prove Impossible proof

 * Edit moved here from article because it's WP:OR

By using Hempel's paradox one could theoretically prove the impossible proof. For example, I make the proposition "All humans except me are foolish".(devil's proof) Normally I would have to examine all of humanity except myself and prove that they are all foolish. However in reality it would be impossible to investigate billions of people. But by using Hempel's paradox, the contrapositive of that proposition would turn into this "not foolish = me". By proving Im wise with Hempel's paradox Im showing that the rest of humanity is foolish. A very fast Q.E.D. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.55.113.61 (talk) 15:30, November 27, 2010

Wiki Education assignment: Writing Workshop
— Assignment last updated by MeeseeksEverywhere (talk) 19:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)