Page 1 of 2
No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
by FlashDangerpants
I have been soundly thrashed by the
dual genius of Advocate and Trajik Logik here. So now I am swapping sides to be with the smart kids.Today we will solve the problem of there being no wood for trees, or trees for woods...
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
Tune in next week to see us take down the definist fallacy be defining stuff not to be fallacious.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:45 pm
by FlashDangerpants
If I had written that post without underlining the sarcasm, at least 3 idiots would have argued about it quite seriously.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 5:40 pm
by Iwannaplato
I solved the problem of equivocation.
It's not a fallacy.
Either you meant X.
Or you meant Y.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 6:12 pm
by Atla
Some people believe in the non sequitur fallacy, but really they just aren't smart enough to see that there is no such thing. Here is an example:
All dogs are named Joe.
My uncle is named Joe.
Therefore my uncle is a dog.
You can clearly see that the third sentence does follow the first two, because it's below them.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 6:27 pm
by Flannel Jesus
Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 5:40 pm
I solved the problem of equivocation.
It's not a fallacy.
Either you meant X.
Or you meant Y.
What about transvocations, which were identified as XX at birth but which now feel more like XY?
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 9:36 pm
by Iwannaplato
Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 6:27 pm
What about transvocations.....
Like, ferry boat captain?
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2023 11:43 pm
by commonsense
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
I have been soundly thrashed by the
dual genius of Advocate and Trajik Logik here. So now I am swapping sides to be with the smart kids.Today we will solve the problem of there being no wood for trees, or trees for woods...
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
Tune in next week to see us take down the definist fallacy be defining stuff not to be fallacious.
You should be given an award for this post.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 12:56 am
by Trajk Logik
This thread should be renamed, "How to Misuse Language".
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 2:12 am
by Impenitent
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
I have been soundly thrashed by the
dual genius of Advocate and Trajik Logik here. So now I am swapping sides to be with the smart kids.Today we will solve the problem of there being no wood for trees, or trees for woods...
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
Tune in next week to see us take down the definist fallacy be defining stuff not to be fallacious.
no wood for trees? are all woodpeckers now homeless and hungry or just the fallacious ones?
-Imp
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 6:14 am
by Iwannaplato
Impenitent wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 2:12 am
no wood for trees? are all woodpeckers now homeless and hungry or just the fallacious ones?
Naming the birds and feeling bad about them is the nominalist fallacy. We can get rid of the woods, no problem. There are no birds.
There I solved two fallacies. Yours and the tree thing.
Yay.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 6:17 am
by Iwannaplato
commonsense wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 11:43 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
I have been soundly thrashed by the
dual genius of Advocate and Trajik Logik here. So now I am swapping sides to be with the smart kids.Today we will solve the problem of there being no wood for trees, or trees for woods...
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
Tune in next week to see us take down the definist fallacy be defining stuff not to be fallacious.
You should be given an award for this post.
FSP is part of nature.
His posts exist and are a part of nature.
Therefore you are engaging in the naturalistic fallacy.
You found something in nature,
so it is good.
But it's actually good cause it's cool.
And if it wasn't cool then it would be bad.
Yay.
I solved the naturalistic fallacy using your post.
Double Yay.
All these problems solved!!
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:10 pm
by Trajk Logik
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
I saw my wood in your girlfriend's bush last night.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:20 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:10 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
I saw my wood in your girlfriend's bush last night.
Eeeew, stop fucking your own mum you dirty little bastard.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2023 1:39 pm
by Trajk Logik
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:20 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:10 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Fri Dec 01, 2023 4:30 pm
If there is a wood then there are trees, ergo you can only see the woods if you can see the trees .... The no wood for trees problem solved!!!!!
I saw my wood in your girlfriend's bush last night.
Eeeew, stop fucking your own mum you dirty little bastard.
So you're saying you date dead people? Now I know why you're such an irritable little dick - you haven't had a real woman in your life. Your own mom doesn't even love you because she never taught you how to behave like a rational human being.
Re: No wood for trees problem solved by geniuses
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2023 2:32 pm
by FlashDangerpants
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2023 1:39 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:20 pm
Trajk Logik wrote: ↑Sat Dec 02, 2023 10:10 pm
I saw my wood in your girlfriend's bush last night.
Eeeew, stop fucking your own mum you dirty little bastard.
So you're saying you date dead people? Now I know why you're such an irritable little dick - you haven't had a real woman in your life. Your own mom doesn't even love you because she never taught you how to behave like a rational human being.
What are you even trying to do here? You've become pathetic.