Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,211 Year: 5,468/9,624 Month: 493/323 Week: 133/204 Day: 3/4 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Logical Question: | willing | not[willing] |able | not[able] |
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1518 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 2 (632207)
09-06-2011 10:56 AM


From Message 437 on the Subjective Evidence of Gods thread:
Hi Dawn Bertot, been awhile.
Interesting, so I am unable or unwilling, to learn, correct. Can you give me another category, that is neither of these two
Try this visualization chart:


willing
not[willing]
able
willing & able
reply made

not[willing] but able
reply not made
not[able]
willing but not[able]
reply not made
not[willing] & not[able]
reply not made
Where not[X] is the logical form for everything that is not [X] (used like (-x) in maths. So we have a grid of (+x), (-x), (+y) and (-y) and four possible results).
Does that sum up your position?
The question then comes down to what "willing" and "able" mean, whether there is a null (0) position, and whether there exists another dimension category.
If we define "able" to mean that they have in good working order whatever is necessary to send and receive and understand the communication, and "willing" to mean caring, motivated, or inclined (etc), then we need to consider if there is a "zero" position between +x and -x for these terms.
When it comes to "willing" it may be possible to be ambivalent (a null position), answering sometimes and other times not, as more of a whim than a willingness, perhaps based on the toss of a coin.


willing
ambivalent
not[willing]
able
willing & able
reply made

ambivalent & able
reply made sometimes\occasionally
not[willing] but able
reply not made
not[able]
willing but not[able]
reply not made
ambivalent but not[able]
reply not made
not[willing] & not[able]
reply not made
Next, if there is a "Z" position\dimension with it's obverse "not{Z}"

{Z}
willing
ambivalent
not[willing]
able
{Z}, willing & able
reply made

{Z}, ambivalent & able
reply made sometimes\occasionally
{Z}, not[willing] but able
reply not made
not[able]
{Z}, willing but not[able]
reply not made
{Z}, ambivalent but not[able]
reply not made
{Z}, not[willing] & not[able]
reply not made
and

not{Z}
willing
ambivalent
not[willing]
able
not{Z}, but willing & able
reply not made
not{Z}, ambivalent & able
reply not made
not{Z}, not[willing] but able
reply not made
not[able]
not{Z}, willing but not[able]
reply not made
not{Z}, ambivalent but not[able]
reply not made
not{Z}, not[willing] & not[able]
reply not made
Your question is what would this {Z} position\dimension be, yes?
Again, the {Z} position could be anything orthogonal to "willing" and "able", including the use of a coin toss.
Enjoy.
Dawn Bertot's reply Message 439:
quote:
RAZD writes
Your question is what would this {Z} position\dimension be, yes?
Again, the {Z} position could be anything orthogonal to "willing" and "able", including the use of a coin toss.
Enjoy.
To admin, would you allow RAZD the time to explain in simple terms what his meaning are here
My interest is to see if he is suggesting that there is actuall another word or area where there is something other than, Willing, Un willing, Able or Unable
Thanks for your consideration
Dawn Bertot
This thread is designed to address just this issue and no others.
My first goal is to restate Dawn Bertot's position to show that I understand it:
Does this show all the possibilities as Spock implied (IIRC the comment was that they did not respond because they were either unwilling or unable to, or something similar):


willing
not[willing]
able
willing & able
reply made

not[willing] but able
reply not made
not[able]
willing but not[able]
reply not made
not[willing] & not[able]
reply not made
Where not[X] is the logical form for everything that is not included in [X] (used like (-x) in maths).
So using the math comparison, we have a grid of (+x), (-x), (+y) and (-y) and four possible results:
  • (+x,+y)
  • (+x,-y)
  • (-x,+y)
  • (-x,-y)
And these could be a plotted as four points on a graph.
Dawn Bertot writes:
My interest is to see if he is suggesting that there is actuall another word or area where there is something other than, Willing, Un willing, Able or Unable
The question, as I see it, is:
Is there another word\concept that needs to be considered: whether there exists another (z) dimension to the graph.
My understanding is that Dawn Bertot says there are no other word\dimension that are not covered in some way by " Willing, Un willing, Able or Unable" -- but if there is, what is an example.
Dawn Bertot: If this does not represent your position, then please correct me.
After we agree that this is the basic position, then we can move on to what is meant by "able" and "willing" and their negatives to see what is covered and whether there are any categories that are not covered.
Enjoy.

There being no forum for logical questions, this would best be sent to Coffee House (I don't want another The Great Debate at this time, nor do I want to restrict participation of others, particularly anyone trying to help either Dawn Bertot or myself).
There should be no barbs or mud slings if all we are discussing is the logic, where it leads, and whether or not it is valid -- this should be like discussing a math problem.
I will ignore posts with insults and expect similar treatment.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 2 of 2 (632212)
09-06-2011 11:15 AM


Thread Copied to Coffee House Forum
Thread copied to the Logical Question: | willing | not[willing] |able | not[able] | thread in the Coffee House forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024