Dual of Well-Ordering is not necessarily Well-Ordering

Theorem
Let $\struct {S, \preccurlyeq}$ be a well-ordered set.

Then its dual $\struct {S, \preccurlyeq}$ is not necessarily also a well-ordered set.

Proof
Consider the ordered structure $\struct {\N, \le}$.

From the Well-Ordering Principle, $\struct {\N, \le}$ is a well-ordered set..

Consider the dual $\struct {\N, \ge}$ of $\struct {\N, \le}$.

Let this be expressed as:
 * $\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq} := \struct {\N, \ge}$

so as to enhance the clarification of the nature of the ordering in question.

From Dual of Total Ordering is Total Ordering, $\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq}$ is a totally ordered set.

$\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq}$ is a well-ordered set.

Then there exists a minimal element of $\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq}$:
 * $\exists m \in \N: \forall x \in \N: x \preccurlyeq m \implies x = m$

But consider $y = m + 1$.

We have:
 * $y \ge m$ but $y \ne m$

That is:
 * $y \preccurlyeq m$ but $y \ne m$

and so $m$ cannot be a minimal element of $\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq}$ after all.

It follows that $\struct {\N, \preccurlyeq}$ is not a well-ordered set.

The result follows by Proof by Contradiction