|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Logic | |||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
Maybe I'm just not understanding you. You're not arrogant, but use English rather than symbols because I'm not good with symbols I'll be honest (I just find myself having to memorize what symbols are which I find difficult). Also, I don't know all the symbols to logic.
Let's look at my setup a mintue; I believe in 1, not 99. You believe in 0, not 100 It's a matter of positions, not just premises, IMHO. In that - you think all 100 are false(I'll assume), whereas I believe 99 are false. But we can only have the knowledge that 99 are false. I think it's reasonable to conclude, from common knowledge, that only one religion can be true(a possibility). I think it's reasonable to conclude that it's also a possibility that none are true. However, if we conclude none are true, we negate the possibility that one is true. Also, we know only one could be true, therefore 99 cannot. So it seems that it's a knowledge that 99 are not, but not a knowledge that 100 are not. Do you get me? Think of it this way now; If 100 are false OR 99 are false, we CAN SAY 99 ARE false, whatever the truth is. But we can't say 100 because that negates the red. I say "logically" because it's the only conclusion we can make; Let's look at it like this; Premise; there are 100 religionsPremise; one might be true Premise; none might be true conclusion; 99 cannot be true. (even if 100 are untrue, we are limited logically because we can only conclude 99 aren't). Remember, we're only dealing with what we DO/can know (when accounting for ALL possibilities). I hope you understand! PS. I'll definitely be away for a while, so there's no rush to get back to me, but I might get a chance to read your post. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 04-30-2005 08:18 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
the wiz writes:
Mike, the underlined sentence isn't even a circular argument, although it does commit another fallacy. Try to figure out which one. The bible says God is true, and God is true because the bible tells me so. It's a circular reasoning which is invalid. BUT WHAT IF the God of the bible is true???
You really need to pay more attention to formal and informal logic in everyday statements. It might make you sound smarter like me
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
It's a bit of a trick question. no, i know, but it was a bit of an attempt to actually provide a valid answer. logically, the chance of one religion being correct does get smaller and smaller. however, with exceptionally large numbers, presumably one would be correct. however, the trick part: we don't know if religions are right in their claim that no other religion is right. they might not be. and we don't know if one CAN be right at all. there's not really enough information. we don't really even know if logic may be applied to something that is essentially out of the realm of naturalism by definition...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
I say "logically" because it's the only conclusion we can make; Let's look at it like this; Premise; there are 100 religionsPremise; one might be true Premise; none might be true conclusion; 99 cannot be true. doesn't follow. you have to add a fourth premise, "one being true excludes all others." otherwise, two might be true. or even all 100.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Dan is a pretty girl I've been told I have nice hair and lovely eyes, it's true. But I'm also awfully flat-chested. I'd contribute something more, but I'm having difficulty seeing something more here than, "I couldn't prove God exists using logic. Therefore, logic is useless." This message has been edited by [Dan's Clever Alias], 05-02-2005 09:44 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
So, your conclusion is that if you start with faulty premises, you get faulty conclusions? I agree. It isn't a problem with logic - it's a problem for people who use faulty premises.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6467 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
conclusion; 99 cannot be true. (even if 100 are untrue, we are limited logically because we can only conclude 99 aren't). Remember, we're only dealing with what we DO/can know (when accounting for ALL possibilities). I hope you understand! That is exactly what I said. If fact, that is the only inference (that I can see) that can be drawn for the three premises. The place where you left the realm of logic was when you said that one position was "more logical" than another. There are no degrees. Either a conclusion is valid or it isn't.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mikehager Member (Idle past 6467 days) Posts: 534 Joined: |
You are exactly correct, I think. I was working with what MTW gave me in a small effort at helping him with what logic can do and what it can't, and why a fallacious argument is not support for an assertion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1344 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
"I couldn't prove God exists using logic. Therefore, logic is useless." unless of course the babelfish is real.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
I created this riddle that can be solved using logical deduction alone. I've tested every angle, I think it's my best riddle yet. In my humble opinion, this is quite a tough one unless you've had experience. It requires some common sense aswell.
RIDDLE OF THE HAT THAT FITS There are five hats in a row, marked 1-5 from left to right. Goal:Locate the hat that fits you. Declare it's place in the row, it's colour and it's size. (There are 3 sizes of hat; Large, medium and small). Premisses: Only one hat fits you. You are not a large size. There are no small hats next to the green hat. The white hat is large. The pink hat is next to the green hat, on the right of it. The green hat is not medium. The blue hat is small. There are no large hats either end. The black hat is not medium size. The white hat is not in the middle. The blue hat is always leftward of the black hat. There are no white hats leftward of the middle. Hint: Just when you think you've finished deducing, have you? This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 10-17-2005 12:06 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
kongstad Member (Idle past 2870 days) Posts: 175 From: Copenhagen, Denmark Joined: |
My answer is this:
The hats are like this from far left to far rigth: (Green,S),(Pink,M),(Blue,S),(White,L),(Black,S). My hat would be the pink Medium, placed as nr 2 from the left. (Highlight empty area above to se answer) /Soren
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
They think that if my argument is invalid, that it is untrue. Not so. Very much to the point. Yes an argument can be invalid but true: the problem is that the truth can not be inferred from the logic but just happens to be so externally (probability low because it is coincidentally so, or probability okay because it is likely so due to other factors not included in the argument). What this is in essence saying is "let's all try again, with feeling ... when it comes around on the guitar ...") I don't know if you've seen it but there is a new site that was linked here on logic constructions and evaluations. It is TruthMapping.comhttp://www.truthmapping.com/index.php And really forces you to use the premise\premise\conclusion format, with ready critique of any mistakes, assumptions and false premises (btw - a falsified premise does invalidate the conclusion ... ) Enjoy. by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
That's correct. Well done, logician.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1398 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
Hey Mike,
Nice problem, sounds like you had fun making it. I was hoping you might post a solution; maybe you can use the same type of HTML that kongstad did? I have two possible answers; one is the same as kongstad. I don't think I'm going to be able to figure out how to eliminate one. I'm interested in seeing your solution (or at least what "critical" steps were necessary or where you think "common pitfalls" will occur) to figure out what I'm not doing that I need to do. Ben
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
Hi Ben, good to hear from you. That's a great picture of Ben and baba having fun.
I have great fun deducing, or failing to deduce. Lol. One can only try eh? Anyway, since I'm not that good a solver of riddles, I've taken to creating them instead. First here's a helper;
Hint; The order of hats is first established, by forcing them into place. Checking possible positions will help. For example, if you had the green and pink hat in 4th and 5th place, then the white hat couldn't go anywhere, because there are no white hats west of the middle, or in the middle. Checking each position will allow you to infer possible scenarios. It's the Columbo-technique of saying, "if this was the case, then this wouldn't be possible". As for the sizes; Just remember only one hat will fit you I'm interested in your other answer, incase my riddle is faulty and there is another possible scenario. In which case I haven't tested it properly. I'm also interested because it's fun seeing how people think, and infer. It doesn't matter if you're wrong, as these riddles are meant to be confusing. Now here's the full answer, so don't look if you still want to try and solve it;
Kongstad's order was correct. What frightens me is how quickly he solved it, lol. (Green,S),(Pink,M),(Blue,S),(White,L),(Black,S). Yours is the medium size pink hat position 2, because "no large hat fits you" is one of the premisses. Also, the pink hat must be medium size, otherwise no hat would fit you. It can't be small, or the other small hats would fit, yet only one hat fits. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 10-17-2005 11:19 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024