[ajuc]

Sentences we are speaking of:

    1: "we are not doing the right things"
    2: "the things we are doing are wrong"

You're right that literal logical interpretation of 2 would be true if we are doing nothing, my bad, I've read this like it had implicit "we are doing semething and " at the start, and I'm quite sure it was meant as such by Bruce, but let's ignore that, and speak logic instead :)

We have:

    D - set of things we are doing
    R - set of things that are right
    W - set of things that are wrong

    statement 1 is "intersection of D and R is empty set"
    statement 2 is "D is subset of W"

You can only change "the things we are doing are wrong" into "the things we are doing are not right" if we assume every thing is either right or wrong. I think there are some possible things that TSA could be doing, that are neither right nor wrong.

When D is not subset of (sum of R and W), then 1 is not equivalent to 2.

[JadeNB]

> When D is not subset of (sum of R and W), then 1 is not equivalent to 2.

Fair enough (though it seems to be different from your original objection); I was implicitly taking 'wrong' as a synonym for 'not right'.

[ajuc]

My original objection was based on intuitive understanding of those sentences, and you're right, it's false when you take them literally.