Are these logically equivalent?

What did you say? And what did you mean by it?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Mortician
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:18 am

Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Mortician »

I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Mortician wrote:I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.
With the first statement it normally means you don't have a passion for any music you happen to like. The second statement normally means you enjoy less varieties of music. That's my interpretation.

PhilX
duszek
Posts: 2356
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by duszek »

Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Mortician wrote:I'm new to this forum and I wanted to bring up a question.

This came up in an argument I had with a friend regarding music. While the question itself does not involve music, this discussion is what spawned it. He believes that the following statements hold logical equivalence:

1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.

For context, he thinks that someone who has a more limited taste in music necessarily enjoys music less than someone who has a broad taste in music. Now, it's true that the latter individual may enjoy more music than the former individual, but that should not imply that he therefore enjoys music more, as it's entirely possible that the former person could possess a much greater passion for the music that he does listen to whereas the latter person may listen to music only on occasion. The two simply do not equate.

So I'm looking for people to dissect the two statements above and show just how they are not equivalent in a technical manner.
1 Spend less time enjoying music
2 Restrict the number of tunes, songs or genres of music that you enjoy.
Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.
Sometimes it can, but that would not change the meaning of the instruction; only the difficultly with complying with it.
duszek
Posts: 2356
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by duszek »

Mortician wrote:
1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.
1. Try to become more indifferent to music. Don´t be so passionate about music.

2. Cut down on the time that you spend listening to music.

I am not a native-speaker of English so it could be that I misunderstand 1. or 2.
Impenitent
Posts: 4330
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Impenitent »

one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Obvious Leo »

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp
This would be my interpretation also. They are not logically equivalent because they address questions of a different nature.
Mortician
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2015 9:18 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Mortician »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
With the first statement it normally means you don't have a passion for any music you happen to like. The second statement normally means you enjoy less varieties of music. That's my interpretation.

PhilX
This has been my interpretation as well. Such an interpretation seems to be obvious prima facie. Furthermore, wouldn't the statement "enjoys music less" be universally quantitative, as in referring to a person's attitude for all music? The statement "enjoys less music" does not seem to share that property, as such a statement's informational content can be adjusted in a myriad of ways. It need not be universal at all. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

duszek wrote:
Mortician wrote:
1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.
1. Try to become more indifferent to music. Don´t be so passionate about music.

2. Cut down on the time that you spend listening to music.

I am not a native-speaker of English so it could be that I misunderstand 1. or 2.
Hmm, you don't have that quite right. Your take on S1 isn't entirely wrong headed, though I'd dispense with your first sentence. It's not so much how you're trying to make yourself respond to music as much as it's how you already do. Take a look at the context that I provided. Someone who enjoys music less would be a person who may only listen to it on occasion, or perhaps rarely. They don't feel much passion for it, so your second sentence is the closest.

Your take on S2, however, is wrong. S2 has nothing to do with time spent listening to music but the variety of the music that is listened to. For instance, some person 1 that enjoys ten genres of music vs. some person 2 that may like only, say, five. Though person 2 can be said to "enjoy less music", he could very easily listen to and enjoy his music just as much as, or even more so than person 1, and so need not necessarily "enjoy music less".

That's been my point.
Obvious Leo wrote:
Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp
This would be my interpretation also. They are not logically equivalent because they address questions of a different nature.
Good observation. This has been my general outlook on it, though I haven't had the best of luck with articulating the way I've wanted to. Like I said above, the two statements seem completely different prima facie, even regarding informational content.
duszek wrote:
Scarcity of anything (music, food etc.) can sharpen your appetite so when it is there you enjoy it more intensly.
That's a great point, actually. I hadn't thought of that. Thanks.

Thanks for the responses, guys. My position all along has been that they're not equivalent, I've just been looking for a way of exposing their differences in a technical manner.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Harbal »

The word "less", in both sentences, signifies a relationship. Without knowing what the relationship is, the question can't be answered. Or, to put it another way, both sentences are incomplete. Or, to put it yet onother way, less than what?
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Harbal wrote:The word "less", in both sentences, signifies a relationship. Without knowing what the relationship is, the question can't be answered. Or, to put it another way, both sentences are incomplete. Or, to put it yet onother way, less than what?
Doesn't matter.
It's always less that the current amount of music. relatively. The only problem would be when a person did not already enjoy any music already.

But enjoying less music, and enjoying music less are logically distinct.

The second hints at specific cases of music (such as album, genres, songs etc), whilst the latter talks about music in general terms of all music.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9557
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Harbal »

Hobbes' Choice wrote: Doesn't matter.
It's always less that the current amount of music. relatively. The only problem would be when a person did not already enjoy any music already.

But enjoying less music, and enjoying music less are logically distinct.

The second hints at specific cases of music (such as album, genres, songs etc), whilst the latter talks about music in general terms of all music.
I think it certainly does matter.
Dubious
Posts: 4000
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Dubious »

Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp
...they are equivalent insofar as frequency responds to degree.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Dubious wrote:
Impenitent wrote:one references degree, the other frequency

they are not equivalent

-Imp
...they are equivalent insofar as frequency responds to degree.
This is not relevant.
The two statements are grammatically distinct and mean different things.

Listening to less music would not effect the amount of time spend listening to music; whilst listening to music less means exactly that - to spend less time listening.
Listening to less music means less variety of music, not less time engaged in music listening.
wtf
Posts: 1178
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:36 pm

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by wtf »

Mortician wrote: 1. Enjoy music less.
2. Enjoy less music.
Neither is a proposition. That is, neither one of those is a statement capable of bearing a truth value. Therefore they can't "have the same truth value" since they have no truth values at all. So the answer is no, they are not logically equivalent.

Are you perhaps asking if they have the same meaning in everyday English? Maybe. They're both ambiguous. Does one mean "Listen to as much music as you always do, but derive less pleasure from it?" Or "Spend less time listening to music than you usually do?" And which would be which?

They're not propositions, they haven't got truth values, and even their everyday meanings are ambiguous.
User avatar
fiveredapples
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2010 10:47 am

Re: Are these logically equivalent?

Post by fiveredapples »

1. Enjoy music less
2. Enjoy less music
Number 1 reads to me as qualitative. For example, to someone who goes bananas when he hears something by Beethoven, we might say: "Calm down, dude, it's just music."

Number 2 reads to me as quantitative. For example, to someone who listens to music 8 hours a day, we might say: "Dude, you need to cut back to 2 or 3 hours a day."

I'm not sure what you're asking for in asking to be shown how they're different "in a technical matter".
Post Reply