[maurile]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If you accept only deductive reasoning as being justified, then we cannot have knowledge of the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tomorrow, nothing will exist which is both red all over, and green all over.

This is a conclusion I arrived at through deductive means.
I know it to be true. Its about the future.

So to answer the OP's question, ya we can have knowledge about the future.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your statement isn't about the future. It's about word definitions.

[/ QUOTE ]

No its a statement about a future state of affairs, ie the future. It requires some discussion of definitions to justify but thats not relevant to what it is about.

Take the statement: In the future pigs will fly.

Using your line of reasoning this statement is not about the future, its about definitions? (or maybe you would say pigs) It seems obvious to me its about both the future and pigs.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Pigs will fly" is about the future because that phrase says something about the world.

"Nothing will be both red all over and green all over" is more like "in the future, two plus two will still equal four." That's not a statement about the world. It's true just because of what the words "two," "plus," "equals," and "four" mean.

Similarly, no objects will be both red all over and green all over simply because of what "red all over" and "green all over" mean. You don't have to know anything about the world to know that the statement will be true. You just have to know some word definitions.