>>14409495Hahahahahaaaaaa, nice one faggot. Fine, I'll bite. All knowledge is certainly not deducible via syllogistic (or any other) logic, unless we limit "knowledge" to something narrower than "all true statements," such as "all things that can be proven" (presumably with syllogistic logic). And of course all things provable in any system can be proven in that system, so that's a non-question. This is obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature, which clearly you do not. OP essentially asked a badly worded question about completeness, so if you want to argue that incompleteness is irrelevant, it's on you to explain why. Or better yet, go back to plebbit
