Euklid: Am I a joke to you? (Re: The curse of Negri & Plato)

Hi,
Generally speaking it is not “elements” if
its only classical logic:
 > Plato (p. 83 of Elements of Logical
 > Reasoning) … excellent book
The ancient Greek had a well developed sense
of constructivity in their geometry, for example
they distinguished between compass-and-straightedge
constructions, and neuseis constructions.
Constructive logic somehow appeals to this sense,
but its not the only way to do non-classical logics.
In a broader sense in mathematical logic its just
the same discipline as the axiomatic method which
is already found in Euklids geometry but applied
to logic itself. Now it is evident, by the correspondence
that I had, that there are people employed in philosophy
departments saying a A <=> B is void if we have:
CL |- A
CL |- B
-------------------
CL |- A <=> B
They never played the axiomatic method and replaced
classical logic (CL) by something else. Lets make an
example from Euclids geometry. Thales theorem and
Pythagroas theorem are both true? So they are equivalent?
So why bother even write a booklet like Euklid elements?
if you need to find the center of a circle
https://youtube.com/shorts/iQeFCnSo41g
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:

Hi,
 I am not halucinating that Negri is nonsense:
 This calculus does not terminate (e.g. on Peirce’s
formula). Negri [42] shows how to add a loop-checking
mechanism to ensure termination. The effect on complexity
isn’t yet clear; but the loop-checking is expensive.
 Intuitionistic Decision Procedures since Gentzen
The Jägerfest - 2013
https://apt13.unibe.ch/slides/Dyckhoff.pdf
 Bye