User Tag List

First 23313233343543 Last

Results 321 to 330 of 581

  1. #321
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,024

    Default

    At the expense of logic. Uh huh.

  2. #322
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    A spirit is conscious. And we know a prefrontal cortex is necessary for consciousness. And we know a tree does not have a prefrontal cortex. So a tree is not conscious. So a tree doesn't have a spirit.
    A forblesnoot has three toes so therefore a four toed banana split is not a forblesnoot.

    References:
    Thraslebort, Johanes B. Moar because Moar! 3rd ed. Northwestingham, 1879
    Herbert von Mockabrack The Spaghetti That Doesn't Have Bones and The Fish That Eat It vol. 27 Furthingston & Furthingston, 1919

  3. #323
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andante View Post
    At the expense of logic. Uh huh.
    What's this in reference to?

  4. #324
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    What's this in reference to?
    Exactly.

  5. #325
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andante View Post
    Exactly.
    Oh yeah, silly me. It's in reference to every single thing I've ever said. Including the bits that come directly from my logic textbook, because you know more about logic than my professor.

  6. #326
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Oh yeah, silly me. It's in reference to every single thing I've ever said. Including the bits that come directly from my logic textbook, because you know more about logic than my professor.
    Fallacy. Appeal to authority.

  7. #327
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    What? Why would "women love apples" be automatically translated to "some women love apples?" The sentence "women love apples" would be translated as "for every x, if x is a woman then x loves apples."
    Ravens Paradox:

    http://www.mathacademy.com/pr/prime/...aven/index.asp

    This is a deliberately simplistic example, but it lays bare what the first step in the scientific method, commonly understood, really amounts to: one makes observations, and forms an inductive hypothesis. The next step, of course, is experimentation to confirm or refute the hypothesis – and it is here that the trouble occurs. In a case like this, experimentation amounts to observing as many ravens as possible, and confirming that they are all black. Now it is impossible, even in principle, to observe every raven, for many no longer exist, many do not yet exist, and it is conceivable that there are creatures one would also wish to call ravens that exist in inaccessible places, such as other planets.

    There are always limits to an experimental apparatus, even if the apparatus is just a matter of observing as many ravens as possible to check their color. Nonetheless, we feel justified in saying that each new observation of a black raven tends to confirm the hypothesis, and in time, if no green or blue or otherwise non-black ravens are observed, our hypothesis will eventually come to have the status of a natural law.

    But is this logical? Note that, logically put, our hypothesis “all ravens are black” has the form of a conditional, that is, a statement of the form “if A then B.” In short, we are saying that if a given object is a raven, then that object is black. According to the laws of logic, a conditional is equivalent to its contrapositive. That is, a statement of the form “if A then B” is equivalent to the statement “if not B then not A.” For example, the statement “if I live in Denver then I live in Colorado” is logically equivalent to the statement “if I do not live in Colorado then I do not live in Denver.” This rule of logic is incontrovertible.

    Our hypothesis “all ravens are black” therefore has the equivalent form “all non-black things are non-ravens,” or more precisely, “if an object isn't black then it is not a raven.” Consequently, if every sighting of a black raven confirms our hypothesis, then every sighting of a non-black non-raven equally confirms our hypothesis.

    I look at my shirt. It's blue. And it is not a raven. Confirmation! My hypothesis that all ravens are black is strengthened! My coffee cup is red. More confirmation. The grass is green, the sky is blue, my computer is gray, my dog is white – all confirming the hypothesis “all ravens are black.”

    Silly, isn't it? (Isn't it?) But by the laws of logic, if I accept inductive hypotheses and confirmation by experiment, then every observation except one that refutes my hypothesis – confirms it. Even if it is totally irrelevant.

  8. #328
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by andante View Post
    Fallacy. Appeal to authority.
    Wrong. Translating statements as outlined in a textbook is not persuasion, or an argument; so appealing to authority does not apply. Contradicting the correct application of logic as an academic discipline would be illogical.

  9. #329
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    It might imply a universal quantifier, but you can't assume one if it's not there. Context clues require interpretation. That's what it says in my textbook anyway. All we can be truly sure about is that "women love apples" means that at least one woman loves apples.
    No, this is a fairly unambiguous case of universal quantification.

    If I were to ask you to write the natural language sentence version of (∃x)(Wx ∧ Ax), you'd be wrong if you wrote "women love apples" because without extra specification that restricts the number, the word "women" refers to the entire class.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  10. #330
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    It could be translated as "All women love apples", and usually is, but not necessarily is what I'm saying. It could be argued that it is ambiguous. Natural language translation would imply a universal quantifier. I'm just pointing out that if it isn't there, you can't automatically assume it.

Similar Threads

  1. Older woman younger man
    By Butterfly in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 06:27 AM
  2. [NF] F woman and T man
    By INTPness in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-15-2010, 03:22 AM
  3. [NF] If you had infinite money,land, and man-power... What would you do for fun?
    By ObeyBunny in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-10-2010, 12:05 AM
  4. The good life and man's relation to society
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 07-23-2008, 11:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO