|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Logic | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1398 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
Mike,
Read nwr's post again. It's funny. Nothing more. Ben
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1398 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
And here's my "general" solution:
This message has been edited by Ben, Thursday, 2005/10/20 08:55 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
guh. please. only two sexes. immaterial of what your brain thinks, you either have xx or you have xy... or you have xxy which defaults female. period. gender is entirely different.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 10-21-2005 01:09 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
*dies*
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
guh. please. only two sexes. immaterial of what your brain thinks, you either have txx or you have xy... or you have xxy which defaults female. period.
It's a lot more complicated with plants and insects, where there can be haploid individuals (only one set of chromosomes). There isn't any obvious reason that there could not be a world with a different sexual arrangement than we have in our world.
gender is entirely different.
Right. It is a grammatical term, and technically has nothing to do with biology.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
yes yes, and to be honest, we are the diploid cycle of our more important haploid gametes. there is no difference between plants and animals. it's a construction. we're precisely the same as moss.
really. think about it for a minute.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6408 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
we are the diploid cycle of our more important haploid gametes.
It's not up to us to decide which is more important. You need both parts of the cycle for it to all work. In any case, there isn't an obvious reason that you couldn't have a system with three sets of chromosomes, and three sexes. We just don't happen to have that on this planet.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
coffee_addict Member (Idle past 477 days) Posts: 3645 From: Indianapolis, IN Joined: |
I am god because I say so, because I am god because I say so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
I've noticed that sometimes the phrase "begging the question" is used in the sense that there is something that needs to be asked. (Often the 'begging' is interpreted as an indication of urgency.)
For example, here Brian said:
Which now begs the question of what was amusing. But this is not what it is about. 'Begging the question' simply means that the conclusion of an argument is assumed - either explicitly or implicitly - in one of the premises, thereby making the argument invalid. It's a logical fallacy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
I know/knew.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
I know. A tautology doesn't have to be logical either, it can be grammatical, if you say the same thing twice.
If Lam had said, "I am the master of the universe, god almighty" and God is, in a manner of speaking, the master of the universe, then that's a grammatical tautology. You might know this already, you could have had previous knowledge of it.
It's a logical fallacy It is? That's like telling an armyman that "that's a gun" in his hand. This message has been edited by mike the wiz, 10-21-2005 10:24 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Those are rifles; the Navy has guns.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3978 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Ben writes: If Lam had said, "I am the master of the universe, god almighty" and God is, in a manner of speaking, the master of the universe, then that's a grammatical tautology. It seems to me that "god almighty" is more a clarifying appositive than part of a tautology. Even just in recent popular culture, a master of the universe could be a cartoon character, stock market analyst/manipulator, a game character, or Bruce.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parasomnium Member Posts: 2224 Joined: |
mike the wiz writes: It is [a logical fallacy]? Well, I meant to say that some people use the term in a different meaning. They don't intend to point out a logical fallacy, but to justify asking a question. To those people I say: "begging the question" is the term for a specific logical fallacy.
That's like telling an armyman that "that's a gun" in his hand. If you meet a person with a gun in his hand, maybe it's wise not to presume to tell them anything. Especially if they are a bit touchy about a gun not being a rifle, or vice versa.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4752 From: u.k Joined: |
I said "IF God is defined this way"
" I am creator of the universe, God almighty ". Does this satisfy you? I hope these attampts to strain at a nat, don't make you swallow a camel. I think the desire of the group, to teach, rather makes them miss the point/s I am trying to make. We could think of many ways to say things twice. Not being able to come up with a perfect example on the spot, doesn't negate the fact that I am correct in describing a grammatical tautology. You do know this don't you? I also notice you didn't mention my correct grammatical tautologies, which leads me to think that your motive is to correct me where I don't need correcting. Forgive me being snappy, it gets a little irritating when people think an angry young animal doesn't know anything, because he needed help with one problem.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024