User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 49

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    671

    Default

    19/26. I was confused as to whether or not to use common knowledge - I know that Ithaca is in NY for example. I found the letter questions easier (and I scored higher) because then the common knowledge issue didn't play into it.

  2. #32
    Senior Member Bear Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    epyT
    Posts
    145

    Default

    20/26

    I took that test a couple months ago and got 15/26 (+ or - 1). I feel like I'm developing, or something.

  3. #33
    homo-loving sonovagun anii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    infp
    Enneagram
    9
    Socionics
    fuck
    Posts
    900

    Default

    11 of 26 answered questions are correctly answered!
    It's official: I suck at logic.
    There's reason to be afraid, and reason to open your heart. ~ Seal

    Refreshment for your ears: www.kexp.org

  4. #34
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    26/26, this was easy. Just use Venn diagrams!
    Yea, you're not supposed to use any calculus first time round

  5. #35
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    25/26 by eyeballing, no paper or charts... I must say I'm disappointed...
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

  6. #36
    Rats off to ya! Mort Belfry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 6sticks View Post
    21/26.
    Same.
    Why do we always come here?

    I guess we'll never know.

    It's like a kind of torture,
    To have to watch this show.

  7. #37
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Can someone please explain how #5's premises are not inconsistent?

    If they are, all of the conclusions follow because the "additional premises" that you need to derive whatever you want are implied by the inconsistent set premises.

    So, while the conclusions may not be immediately derivable given the statements, one could use this language's transformation rules to derive additional conclusions that would enable the logician to show that each of the conclusions listed do in fact follow from the premises!

    :steam:

  8. #38
    Senior Member Cerpin_Taxt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    132

    Default

    1st time: 19/26
    2nd time -- without checking answers: 24/26
    One by one, over the months, the other bulbs burn out, and are gone. The first few of these hit Byron hard. He's still a new arrival, still hasn't accepted his immortality. But on through the burning hours he starts to learn about the transience of others: learns that loving them while they're here becomes easier, and also more intense—to love as if each design-hour will be the last.

    Thomas Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

    I can't go on, I'll go on.

    Samuel Beckett - The Unnamable

  9. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Only 18/26.

  10. #40
    Wonderer Samuel De Mazarin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    Can someone please explain how #5's premises are not inconsistent?

    If they are, all of the conclusions follow because the "additional premises" that you need to derive whatever you want are implied by the inconsistent set premises.

    So, while the conclusions may not be immediately derivable given the statements, one could use this language's transformation rules to derive additional conclusions that would enable the logician to show that each of the conclusions listed do in fact follow from the premises!

    :steam:
    P: (1) Some A that are B are not C that are D
    (2) All A are C

    C: a. Some A that are D are C that are B
    b. Some C are not D
    c. Some B are not C
    d. Some A are D


    NB: Instead of using an ampersand (&) I'll use a hyphen for conjunctive relationships... easier to read...

    - Some A are B... (from 1)
    - Of those A-B, there are some A-B which are not C-D... (from 1)
    To paraphrase this last one... there are A-Bs which are not-also C-Ds... but that doesn't necessarily mean that there aren't A-B's which are C-notD's... again, in other words, of A-Bs which are C's they don't necessarily have to have/be D.
    - All A are C (from 2)

    For fun and ease of comprehension, let's paraphrase these two premises...

    (1) "There exist some females(A) that are human(B) which are not living things(C) with x-ray vision(D)." Or E(x) | A-B -> NOT C-D.
    (2) "All females(A) are living things(C)." or A(x) | A -> C


    To explain why the premises aren't inconsistent... the only two assertions of existence available for our use are that

    - there are A's and all of them are C.... those females which exist are all living things...

    - there exist A's that are also B.... which are not also C's which are D.... there exist females that are also human, but which at the same time are not living x-ray vision-endowed beings... that doesn't contradict the statement that all females are living things (All A's are C)... I can truthfully say that I'm not a living thing with x-ray vision... I can also truthfully say that I'm a living thing. This involves the notions that an "AND" statement (C-D) is only true if both propositions involved in the conjunction are true... if one, say C, is true, while the other, say D, is false, the conjunction C-D is false. Hence, I can say NOT 'C-D' while still truthfully asserting C

    Why? Because the statement that there are no A-B's which are also C-D's does NOT preclude the possibility of there being A-B's which are simply C.

    __________________________________________________ ____________


    a. Some A that are D are C that are B. DOESN'T FOLLOW
    "Some females that have x-ray vision are (also) living things that are human."

    I think we'll all agree that the premises do NOT support this conclusion. We have no information leading us to believe that there are any such things in existence which satisfy the condition of being both A and D [females having x-ray vision]. Indeed, we have no statement telling us that there are any D's at all!

    b. Some C are not D. FOLLOWS
    "Some living things do not have x-ray vision."

    This follows... since we know for a fact all A are C (all females are living things) and that there exist some A-B-C (there are females which are human which are living things) that are explicitly not D (x-ray vision equipped), there must be C's which are not D. No word yet on whether there ARE actually living things with x-ray vision (in other words, we still don't know if there are C-D's out there).

    c. Some B are not C. DOESN'T FOLLOW
    "Some humans are not living things."

    We have no proof of this. All we know about any Bs is that the only ones we've encountered have been A... we don't even know if there are any Bs which are NOT A... in other words, from the information given we have no idea whether or not there are humans which are not female... and since all females we've encountered are living things, all humans we've encountered are living things as well... maybe there are mysterious humans which are not female and also not living things... I see in illogic the beginnings of a new fundamentalist feminism...

    d. Some A are D. DOESN'T FOLLOW
    "Some females have the power of x-ray vision."

    First off... neither of the premises says anything about the actual existence of things/beings which are D, or have x-ray vision... we have no idea... there COULD be... but we don't know... so we can't suddenly go around asserting the existence of beings with x-ray vision, let alone females blessed with the aforementioned power.
    Madman's azure lie: a zen miasma ruled.

    Realize us, Madman!

    I razed a slum, Amen.

    ...............................................

Similar Threads

  1. After 9 personality tests.... what do you think?
    By Eastwood in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-22-2016, 12:14 AM
  2. [NT] NTs what do you spend most of the time thinking about?
    By yenom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 05-30-2009, 11:30 PM
  3. [SJ] SJ's, what do you score on the enneagram (using the link provided)?
    By cogdecree in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-15-2009, 08:37 PM
  4. [MBTItm] What do you NF's think of the other temperaments?
    By animenagai in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 01-22-2009, 12:12 AM
  5. What do you fear the most?
    By alcea rosea in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 04:05 PM

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