Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,648 Year: 4,905/9,624 Month: 253/427 Week: 63/103 Day: 7/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Logical Question: | willing | not[willing] |able | not[able] |
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 136 of 211 (633664)
09-15-2011 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by rueh
09-15-2011 8:18 AM


Re: chance and necessity
Hi rueh
No I don't believe I am confusing the two.
So you agree that being too conflicted - unwilling - to decide is not the same as willing to respond?
Do you also agree that being too conflicted - unwilling - to decide is not the same as unwilling to respond?
Possibilities Willing
to decide
Unwilling
to decide
Willing to respond Willing to decide
& Willing to respond
Unwilling to decide
& Willing to respond
Unwilling to respond Willing to decide
& Unwilling to respond
Unwilling to decide
& Unwilling to respond
I believe it does make you unwilling, at least temporarily. You are weighing the information and determining that a response is not needed as this point so you are unwilling to respond, at this point in time.
It makes you willing to respond if there is time. It is the other time constraint priorities that block the response NOT the [able]ness and [willing]ness.
Or the situation could need your immediate attention in which case you are unable to respond at this point.
The is called affirming the consequent -- assuming it must be one or the other rather than some additional alternative.
You are still cap[able] of responding - you have the necessary power, skill, resources, or qualifications, yes? Ability to do an action is not lost by not doing the action.
I don't like to ride my bike in the rain, that does not mean that I am not able to ride my bike in the rain, or that I would not ride my bike in the rain if it were a high priority task (emergency), or that I will not ride my bike as soon as the rain stops.
In the next month I plan to ride my bike. Prediction: by the end of the month I will have ridden my bike, even if there are days filled with rain (which is also predicted).
The conditions affect when, not whether, I will ride my bike.
My ability to ride my bike is unaffected.
If we consider your diagram than I believe that the outcomes can be summed up as follows.
A= Willing to decide based on empirical evidence
B= Willing to decide based on inadequate evidence
C= Unwilling to decide at this point
D= Willing to make a decision based on opinion anyway.
I am undecided\conflicted at this time whether to walk or run -- Does that make me willing to walk? Does it make me unwilling to walk? does that make me willing to run? Does it make me unwilling to run? Does it make me unwilling or willing to move? Does it affect my [able]ness to run or to walk?
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : ...
Edited by RAZD, : clrty
Edited by RAZD, : fixed table per Message 144

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 8:18 AM rueh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 4:50 PM RAZD has replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3747 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 137 of 211 (633666)
09-15-2011 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Panda
09-15-2011 8:54 AM


Re: chance and necessity
Well if we take compulsion to mean an irresistible persistent impulse to perform an act, then willingness is a non factor. However the antonym of compulsion is free-will. So you can’t have a non compulsion with out being free to choose between willing and unwilling. So if Spock were to say that "there is only three reasons why they did not respond. They are either unable, unwilling or do not suffer from a compulsion" doesn't make any sense. They may have a compulsion to not respond but that makes them unable. Since it would be an inability to perform an act.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 8:54 AM Panda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 12:34 PM rueh has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 138 of 211 (633668)
09-15-2011 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by Panda
09-15-2011 8:27 AM


Re: chance and necessity
Hi Panda,
I think that RAZD's example involving the flower was better, because there you have a response which is without a choice.
Yes, it is a programed automatic response to stimulii.
Maybe the 3rd option from 'Willing' and 'Unwilling' is 'Mindless Compulsion'?
Wouldn't that be in place of [willing]ness? Under [compulsive behavior] there is no willing and there is no unwilling, as the compulsive\programed response over-rides the [willing]ness.
Enjoy.

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 8:27 AM Panda has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 139 of 211 (633670)
09-15-2011 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by rueh
09-15-2011 12:03 PM


cannot be made unable
Hi again rueh,
You are confusing the adjective with the task action
They may have a compulsion to not respond but that makes them unable. Since it would be an inability to perform an act.
No, it blocks the action from occurring. It doesn't take away the ability.
A deer is able to run, but it freezes (compulsion) when caught in the headlights, and when the deer overrides the compulsive freezing it is able to run.
Are they willing to run or unwilling to run?
Message 26: disposed or consenting; inclined
Yes
Are they able to run or unable to run?
Message 26: having necessary power, skill, resources, or qualifications; qualified
Yes
Are they compelled to run or compelled to not run?
Compelled to not run
Compelled Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
quote:
com•pel
1. to force or drive, especially to a course of action: His disregard of the rules compels us to dismiss him.
2. to secure or bring about by force.
3. to force to submit; subdue.
4. to overpower.
5. Archaic to drive together; unite by force; herd.
6. to use force.
7. to have a powerful and irresistible effect, influence, etc.
Enjoy.

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 12:03 PM rueh has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 140 of 211 (633671)
09-15-2011 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Dawn Bertot
09-14-2011 8:58 PM


Anyway I am not sure who is still playing but my original example and illustration was in conjunction with and to help demonstrate the only two logical possibilites for the existence of anything.
No, they're not the only possibilities for everything...
RAZD has done a good job showing how there are other possibilties for some things.
Which examples, specifically, are you disagreeing with?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-14-2011 8:58 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 10:33 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 153 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-17-2011 9:31 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 141 of 211 (633680)
09-15-2011 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Panda
09-15-2011 8:54 AM


Re: chance and necessity
Hi Panda
I like the edits. Mostly ...
able + compulsed
able + un-compulsed
unable + compulsed
unable + un-compulsed
I agree that [willing]ness is no longer a factor when complusions\programs\rules take over the decision process -- this is the case with the sunflower.
My only nits are
(1) that I would use
  • Compulsive action
  • Compulsive inaction
  • Non-compulsive reaction
And
(2) that [willing]ness only applies when there is Non-compulsive reaction/s.
Thus I would get
Possibilities Non-compulsive Willing Non-compulsive Unwilling Compulsive action Compulsive inaction
Able (1) Able and
Non-compulsive Willing
(2) Able and
Non-compulsive Unwilling
(3) Able and
Compulsive action
(4) Able and
Compulsive inaction
Unable (5) Unable and
Non-compulsive Willing
(6) Unable and
Non-compulsive Unwilling
(7) Unable and
Compulsive action
(8) Unable and
Compulsive inaction
In case (1) the action is taken.
In case (2) the action is blocked by unwilling
In case (3) the action is taken.
In case (4) the action is blocked by compulsive inaction in spite of being able
In case (5) the action is blocked by unable
In case (6) the action is blocked by unwilling and unable
In case (7) the action is compulsively attempted but it is blocked by being unable
In case (8) the action is blocked by unable and compulsive inaction
You could also use programed action and programed inaction or ruled action and ruled inaction (overruled action?) with similar meaning
Case (4) - not unable, not unwilling, action not taken due to compulsive\programed\ruled inaction
Example: a soldier goes to his superior officer and volunteers for an action he proposes
He is able (or he wouldn't volunteer to do the task)
He is willing (or he wouldn't volunteer to do the task)
The task is not done if the superior officer overrules him and refuses to let him take the action.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : program\rule
Edited by RAZD, : overruled
Edited by RAZD, : example

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 8:54 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 1:50 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 143 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 1:50 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3799 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 142 of 211 (633689)
09-15-2011 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by RAZD
09-15-2011 1:21 PM


Re: chance and necessity
Hi RAZD,
I wanted to post a little more than just an 'acknowledges reply' - as I think I agree with your extension of my post.
But my web-site had gone bat-shit, so I'll have to skip giving you the reply your post deserved.
*acknowledges reply* x 5

Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR
Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 1:21 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 5:13 PM Panda has replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3799 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 143 of 211 (633690)
09-15-2011 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by RAZD
09-15-2011 1:21 PM


Re: chance and necessity
*double post*
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR
Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 1:21 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3747 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 144 of 211 (633695)
09-15-2011 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by RAZD
09-15-2011 11:57 AM


Re: chance and necessity
Hello RAZD
So you agree that being too conflicted - unwilling - to decide is not the same as willing to respond?
Do you also agree that being too conflicted - unwilling - to decide is not the same as unwilling to respond?
It depends on what the required action is. If I am required to respond and my ambivalence prevents that from occurring than I am unable to respond. ( I realize that I was using unwilling before and I may have needed to use unable). Ambivalence is a reason why there is no response but the ultimate outcome is that it makes me unable to respond. The same is true with the deer he is able to run until he is compelled to not run. At which time he is unable to run. When the compulsion is alleviated than he is able to run again. I am not sure if that is affirming the consequence or not. Maybe you could help me see the error. If affirming the consequent is-
1.If P, then Q.
2.Q.
3.Therefore, P.
P=compulsion, ambivalence, etc.
Q=unable
I don't think that my argument is-
1. If Compelled then Unable
2. Unable
3. Therefore compelled
The way I am trying to express my argument is
1. If P, then Q
2. P
3. Therefore Q.
Or
1. If compelled, ambivalent, etc. then unable
2. compelled, ambivalent, etc.
3. therefore unable
Ambivalence, compulsion, what have you, could be the reason but the ultimate outcome is inability.
RAZD writes:
I don't like to ride my bike in the rain, that does not mean that I am not able to ride my bike in the rain, or that I would not ride my bike in the rain if it were a high priority task (emergency), or that I will not ride my bike as soon as the rain stops.
In the next month I plan to ride my bike. Prediction: by the end of the month I will have ridden my bike, even if there are days filled with rain (which is also predicted).
The conditions affect when, not whether, I will ride my bike.
My ability to ride my bike is unaffected.
Your ability to ride may be unaffected but your willingness is. If it is raining you are unwilling to ride your bike. You could ride, you enjoy riding except in the rain so you choose not to ride. Therefore you are unwilling to ride. There could be stipulations that effect your willingness such as priorities, at which time your unwillingness changes to willingness (but grumpy )
1.If rain, then unwilling to ride
2. Rain
3. Therefore unwilling
or if we have other factors that affect your willingness then it would be
1. If P, then Q, unless X
2. P and X
3. Therefore not Q
1. If rain, then unwilling, unless late (for example)
2. Rain and late
3. Therefore not unwilling
I agree that there can be reasons or possibilities for an action or inaction however I still think that all your examples can be expressed as either able, not able, willing, not willing.
As a side note. Your table in the message I was responding to had an error. Message 136 You have unwilling to decide in both a row and a column.
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 11:57 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-15-2011 5:15 PM rueh has not replied
 Message 148 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 6:11 PM rueh has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 145 of 211 (633699)
09-15-2011 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Panda
09-15-2011 1:50 PM


Re: chance and necessity
Thanks Panda,
But my web-site had gone bat-shit, ...
Yeah, mine does than now and then, usually during a reply flipping up and down the page too fast to read. I don't see it on other pages, so it may be a bug.
What I find amusing is the image for:
In case (7) the action is compulsively attempted but it is blocked by being unable
Of someone compelled to keep trying even though it doesn't work.
How many times do you see people repeating failure expecting positive results the next time ...
Enjoy

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 1:50 PM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Panda, posted 09-15-2011 6:03 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 146 of 211 (633700)
09-15-2011 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by rueh
09-15-2011 4:50 PM


Re: chance and necessity
I still think that all your examples can be expressed as either able, not able, willing, not willing. There can be reasons for these but they are all expressed as the four aforementioned states.
I think apathy could be an additional state... depending on what we mean by "willing"
But the attitude of: "yeah, I would... but meh" seems to be different than "I won't".
Too, when dealing with non-conscious entities, there's no place for willingness at all.
Or if a third party is involved that stops the action's completion even though it was initiated could be something that doesn't make the person unable or unwilling.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 4:50 PM rueh has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3799 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 147 of 211 (633707)
09-15-2011 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by RAZD
09-15-2011 5:13 PM


Re: chance and necessity
RAZD writes:
Yeah, mine does than now and then, usually during a reply flipping up and down the page too fast to read. I don't see it on other pages, so it may be a bug.
It was my incompetent web-host.
After dozens of people (on the same IP address) reported their domains were unavailable, they eventually figured out that there might be a problem with their servers.
RAZD writes:
How many times do you see people repeating failure expecting positive results the next time ...
The National Lottery!
Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR
Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 5:13 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 148 of 211 (633708)
09-15-2011 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by rueh
09-15-2011 4:50 PM


ok who did a rain dance on my parade?
Hi rueh,
It depends on what the required action is. If I am required to respond and my ambivalence prevents that from occurring than I am unable to respond.
This is what I mean by affirming the consequent.
Maybe you could help me see the error. If affirming the consequent is-
1.If P, then Q.
2.Q.
3.Therefore, P.
P=compulsion, ambivalence, etc.
Q=unable
I don't think that my argument is-
1. If Compelled then Unable
2. Unable
3. Therefore compelled
The way I am trying to express my argument is
1. If P, then Q
2. P
Good, you looked it up (or knew it). Not many people would. The way I see it is this:
Premise 1: if I am unable to respond, then no response will be made
Premise 2: No response is made
Conclusion 1: Therefore I am unable to respond
and (this is the next step, and I could talk here about cognitive dissonance, where you have dissonance between able and failed response, forcing you to this next conclusion)
Conclusion 2: Therefore whatever made the response fail made me unable to respond
Whenever someone says "but that made you unable" this is what I see happening. This can be followed by ...
Conclusion 3:"or it made you unwilling"
... which to me is tacit admission that it is NOT unable and NOT unwilling, but the dissonance between that and the belief that one or the other must be responsible.
Or
1. If compelled, ambivalent, etc. then unable
2. compelled, ambivalent, etc.
3. therefore unable
This is begging the question -- here you've defined "compelled, ambivalent," to be unable, not concluded that being "compelled, ambivalent," makes you unable: your conclusion is built into the definition of "compelled, ambivalent," and you don't allow consideration that you can be "compelled, ambivalent," AND able. Compare that to
Premise 1: if I am ambivalent about responding, then a response may not be made
Premise 2: I am ambivalent about responding
Conclusion 1: Therefore a response may not be made
Your ability to ride may be unaffected but your willingness is. If it is raining you are unwilling to ride your bike. You could ride, you enjoy riding except in the rain so you choose not to ride. Therefore you are unwilling to ride. There could be stipulations that effect your willingness such as priorities, at which time your unwillingness changes to willingness (but grumpy )
1.If rain, then unwilling to ride
2. Rain
3. Therefore unwilling
or if we have other factors that affect your willingness then it would be
1. If P, then Q, unless X
2. P and X
3. Therefore not Q
1. If rain, then unwilling, unless late (for example)
2. Rain and late
3. Therefore not unwilling
I agree that there can be reasons or possibilities for an action or inaction however I still think that all your examples can be expressed as either able, not able, willing, not willing.
Amusingly I was just out for a quick ride into town, and I was caught by a downburst of rain. It poured and many people were caught. People looked at me funnily as I was laughing loudly at the situation: there I was, riding in the rain, willing or not. I am home and dried off now.
If I was truly unwilling to ride in the rain, then I would have jumped off the bike, but instead I kept riding to my destination (and waited there until the rain stopped before coming home).
What you have here is a conditional [willing]ness, rather than an absolute [willing]ness, and the conditional [willing]ness is dependent on factors beyond one's control. Conditions can change.
I can also see conditions where you can be able and willing but forced to inaction, and conditions where you can be able but unwilling and forced to action, you can be unhappy about being forced against your will, but that doesn't make you willing or unwilling.
Enjoy

As a side note. Your table in the message I was responding to had an error. Message 136 You have unwilling to decide in both a row and a column.
and the corners were misplaced ...
Thanks - fixed now
Edited by RAZD, : clrty
Edited by RAZD, : subtitle

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by rueh, posted 09-15-2011 4:50 PM rueh has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by rueh, posted 09-16-2011 10:25 AM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1491 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 149 of 211 (633738)
09-15-2011 10:33 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by New Cat's Eye
09-15-2011 12:37 PM


Hi Catholic Scientist
Thanks
RAZD has done a good job showing how there are other possibilties for some things.
Which examples, specifically, are you disagreeing with?
It looks like Dawn Bertot Message 124 may have declared victory and left the thread ... (or are you just reading Dawn?)
... oh well.
Enjoy.

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)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by New Cat's Eye, posted 09-15-2011 12:37 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
rueh
Member (Idle past 3747 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


(1)
Message 150 of 211 (633767)
09-16-2011 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by RAZD
09-15-2011 6:11 PM


Re: ok who did a rain dance on my parade?
Good morning RAZD,
RAZD writes:
Good, you looked it up (or knew it). Not many people would.
I knew the basic concept of the fallacy but not the mathematical expression of it.
RAZD writes:
The way I see it is this:
Premise 1: if I am unable to respond, then no response will be made
Premise 2: No response is made
Conclusion 1: Therefore I am unable to respond
and (this is the next step, and I could talk here about cognitive dissonance, where you have dissonance between able and failed response, forcing you to this next conclusion)
Conclusion 2: Therefore whatever made the response fail made me unable to respond
Whenever someone says "but that made you unable" this is what I see happening. This can be followed by ...
Conclusion 3:"or it made you unwilling"
... which to me is tacit admission that it is NOT unable and NOT unwilling, but the dissonance between that and the belief that one or the other must be responsible.
That is not the way I am presenting my argument. At least it is not the way I am trying to present it. [abe]I believe that you have my premise 1 reversed. I am saying that
  • If there is no response made, then you are unable to respond
  • no response made
  • therefore you are unable to respond
I am not saying that something else couldn't have caused the none response, but that it can be expressed as unable or unwilling.[/abe]
RAZD writes:
This is begging the question -- here you've defined "compelled, ambivalent," to be unable, not concluded that being "compelled, ambivalent," makes you unable: your conclusion is built into the definition of "compelled, ambivalent," and you don't allow consideration that you can be "compelled, ambivalent," AND able
True I am using a very broad definition of the word able. I am saying that ambivalence, compulsion is the reason why a response is not made but it can be expressed as unable for all intensive purposes. If we narrowly define able to mean a skill, or a resource, then yes you can be able, willing and still not respond. However if we use the broader definition of able then it is correct. You yourself agreed to a broad definition when we were defining terms. In case you do not recall in Message 26 We agreed that able was defined as -
Able Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
quote:
adjective
1. having necessary power, skill, resources, or qualifications; qualified: able to lift a two-hundred-pound weight; able to write music; able to travel widely; able to vote.
and
- adj
1. ( postpositive ) having the necessary power, resources, skill, time, opportunity, etc, to do something: able to swim
and
Function: adjective
1 : possessed of needed powers or of needed resources to accomplish an objective < able to perform under the contract>
Notice the bolded section of etcetera in the definition.
Meaning : a number of unspecified additional persons or things.
So by that definition anything that allows you to do something or accomplish a task would make you able, by definition. Or conversely anything that prevents you from doing the same would unable you. It may be begging the question but by the standards of our definition it is grammatically correct. Just so I am clear. I do agree that there are any numerous reasons that a task can be not accomplished. All of these could have been expressed by Spock in his explanation. However for the point of brevity he is correct as being able to express these reasons as either unable or unwilling.
RAZD writes:
Amusingly I was just out for a quick ride into town, and I was caught by a downburst of rain. It poured and many people were caught. People looked at me funnily as I was laughing loudly at the situation: there I was, riding in the rain, willing or not. I am home and dried off now.
If I was truly unwilling to ride in the rain, then I would have jumped off the bike, but instead I kept riding to my destination (and waited there until the rain stopped before coming home).
Funny how life works like that isn't it? My girlfriend has the habit of talking about something and then that situation occurring all the time. That's why I try and encourage her to always talk about positive things I believe that in your circumstance is where the additional X factors apply.
  1. If P, then Q, unless X
  2. P and X
  3. Therefore not Q
  • P= Rain
  • Q= unwilling
  • X= already riding
Here the X factor was that you were already riding your bike
and I agree that in these circumstances you were both willing and able. However my argument is not that you would be either unable or unwilling. It is that any given action can be expressed as either willing, able, unwilling, unable and your story highlights this. You were still able and still willing to ride the bike. If either of these conditions had changed. Either you were unable or unwilling to ride the bike, then you would not have done so.
I thought about this last night before I went to bed and came up with what I believe is a true circumstance where unable or unwilling cannot express the incompletion of a given task, without relying on the definition of either able or willing. It has to do with how we define the purpose of the given task. If we broadly define it then you can be able and willing but the task can be unaccomplished. However, if we specify the definition of it, than you can not be able or willing and the task remain unaccomplished. I believe it relates to our Spock example that inspired this conversation and may allow for Spock to use the word respond instead of communicate and still be correct.
For example:
  • Our given task is for me to talk to you.
  • I speak English and not French.
  • You speak French and do not understand English.
If we define talk as to have words come out of my mouth. A broad definition. Then I am able, willing and the task is accomplished. However if we define the task of talking to you as words come out of my mouth, are heard by you and are understood by you. A specified definition. Then I am now willing but unable to talk even though there are words coming out of my mouth. Since in this case the specified action is for my words to come out of my mouth, be heard by you and be understood by you. Given these circumstances I am unable to accomplish the latter part of the task.
So in our Spock example, if we define respond as, a transmission sent for the purpose of being received and understood by a second party, in this case the Enterprise. This gives us three things about a response that has to be fulfilled in order to be successful.
  • Response sent
  • Response received
  • Response understood
Then the ship is unable to respond since they are unable to accomplish the purpose of the task. The may be able to send the response but since the second and third part of the task is unfulfilled then they are unable to complete the task in its entirety.
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.
Edited by rueh, : Clear up some formating
Edited by rueh, : No reason given.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by RAZD, posted 09-15-2011 6:11 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by RAZD, posted 09-19-2011 12:08 PM rueh has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024