Therefore the implication is strictly one-directional, and conflating the two reducibilities obscures the finer degree-theoretic distinctions Post's program was designed to expose.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Conflating: Conflating means mixing together or treating two different things as if they were the same thing, when they're actually distinct. It's a logical error where someone blurs important differences between concepts, ideas, or situations to make an argument seem stronger than it is. For example, conflating "being critical of a policy" with "being disloyal to your country" wrongly equates two separate things.
Degree-theoretic(in logic and metaphysics): Related to a theory that measures truth and properties in degrees or gradations rather than as absolute categories.
Implication(as what the arrow symbol (→) represents): A logical connection between two statements where if the first is true, the second must also be true; written as 'p → q' meaning 'if p then q.'
One-directional(describing the flow of meaning between words): Moving or flowing in only one direction, rather than going both ways.

Based on where you are in your exploration