Okay, so for now, the other thread seems to be civil. So, I will try to address this:

I would like to address another point you made:

Originally Posted by

**Speakpigeon**
This question is in fact quite difficult to assess. Nearly all mathematicians use in fact their logical intuition to prove theorems. Thus, they don't have to rely on any method of formal proof and thus it doesn't seem to matter that mathematical logic should be wrong.

Actually, mathematicians prove plenty of things that cannot be proven under AL. In the other thread, Bomb#20

gave a much simpler example than complex mathematics. In fact, CML is

**very intuitive to most mathematicians**. So, it seems mathematicians are managing to develop intuitions to use a logic that is superior to human logic, at least in the context of mathematics (whether it's also superior in other contexts is a matter that requires a different discussion, but it definitely is in mathematics, in the sense it is better for finding truths).

Mathematics would not look as it does now under AL. It would look

**radically** different, as even very simple things could not be proven.