Poll on the validity of two arguments

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Are these two arguments valid?

Poll ended at Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:34 pm

1st argument - Valid
4
25%
1st argument - Not valid
3
19%
1st argument - I don't know
1
6%
1st argument - The argument doesn't make sense
1
6%
2nd argument - Valid
4
25%
2nd argument - Not valid
3
19%
2nd argument - I don't know
0
No votes
2nd argument - The argument doesn't make sense
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 16

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:52 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:29 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:14 pm
I told you what you had missed.
No - you didn't.

You said:

"Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying."

But you don't bother to argue why they are not good, and why the second is ridiculous.

If you want a philosophical debate, the least you should do is to argue for your position.
Try to be more honest. you are pretending I didn't also give you this information...
The bit you dishonestly edited out of my reply wrote: You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context.
Which is the correct information.

I am not here to teach you, the man who calls himself "philosopher" the absolute simplest basic thing in the whole of philosophy. The thing they teach on day one in any intro to philosophy course is literally what is an argument, and what gives them validity. You have Google for that. Or, you know, you could read a book about philosophy any time you want. All of the simplest books on the subject will start by explaining what you are failing to understand here.

philosopher
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by philosopher » Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:56 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:52 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:29 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:14 pm
I told you what you had missed.
No - you didn't.

You said:

"Neither argument is any good, the second is ridiculous. The purpose of presenting an online poll in this matter is mystifying."

But you don't bother to argue why they are not good, and why the second is ridiculous.

If you want a philosophical debate, the least you should do is to argue for your position.
Try to be more honest. you are pretending I didn't also give you this information...
The bit you dishonestly edited out of my reply wrote: You either don't understand what makes something an argument in a philosophical context, or what makes an argument valid in a philosophical context.
Which is the correct information.

I am not here to teach you, the man who calls himself "philosopher" the absolute simplest basic thing in the whole of philosophy. The thing they teach on day one in any intro to philosophy course is literally what is an argument, and what gives them validity. You have Google for that. Or, you know, you could read a book about philosophy any time you want. All of the simplest books on the subject will start by explaining what you are failing to understand here.
Now we're on page 2 and all you do is throw ad-hominem attacks on me, instead of arguing why it is not a logical argument.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:05 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:56 pm
Now we're on page 2 and all you do is throw ad-hominem attacks on me, instead of arguing why it is not a logical argument.
If you understood philosophy you would realise that not all ad hominem arguments are fallacious, that's just a thing that bozos on the internet believe. Also you would know that what an ad hominem actually is, and you wouldn't be making that false accusation.

If you had just done what I said and learned the elementary basics of validity, you would see that the relationship between the premises and the conclusion is not solid enough for those arguments to be considered valid. that aspect of the whole thing isn't even worth discussion. I'm not going further than that because the OP, like everyone else who knows about this stuff, is fully aware that they aren't valid. That's why I questioned what his ulterior purpose is.

I'm sorry if you wish to be considered an expert even though you can't keep up. You can either learn this shit by some minor effort, or you can whine about it. Your problem.

philosopher
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by philosopher » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:39 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:05 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 4:56 pm
Now we're on page 2 and all you do is throw ad-hominem attacks on me, instead of arguing why it is not a logical argument.
If you understood philosophy you would realise that not all ad hominem arguments are fallacious, that's just a thing that bozos on the internet believe. Also you would know that what an ad hominem actually is, and you wouldn't be making that false accusation.

If you had just done what I said and learned the elementary basics of validity, you would see that the relationship between the premises and the conclusion is not solid enough for those arguments to be considered valid. that aspect of the whole thing isn't even worth discussion. I'm not going further than that because the OP, like everyone else who knows about this stuff, is fully aware that they aren't valid. That's why I questioned what his ulterior purpose is.

I'm sorry if you wish to be considered an expert even though you can't keep up. You can either learn this shit by some minor effort, or you can whine about it. Your problem.
I'd like to start all over:

P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.


This is how I came to the conclusion that the argument is true:

Example:

C is the object (cube) that can do "something" (rotate or move along X-axis) in a 3D-space.
B is a checkbox in C's properties with 2 options - move or rotate.
A is the value of B - Move/Rotate.

Re-phrased it will sound like this:

P1 - The checkbox B has a value A which is Rotate.
P2 - What the object C does is determined by the value of B.
C - Therefore, what C does is dermined by the A - it rotates.

Where's the flaws?

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:49 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:39 pm
Where's the flaws?
I didn't even have to bother reading those. Just look at what you dropped when you rewrote the thing.

philosopher
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by philosopher » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:53 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:49 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:39 pm
Where's the flaws?
I didn't even have to bother reading those. Just look at what you dropped when you rewrote the thing.
What did I drop?
I presented a real-world example of how the argument could be valid.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:56 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:53 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:49 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:39 pm
Where's the flaws?
I didn't even have to bother reading those. Just look at what you dropped when you rewrote the thing.
What did I drop?
I presented a real-world example of how the argument could be true.
For all we know, philosopher made a very significant change to the arguments.
Defending an argument requires maintaining its actual structure.
Therefore, we sort of suspect, without proving anything, that philosopher failed to defend the arguments.

Was that too subtle for you?

philosopher
Posts: 373
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by philosopher » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:58 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:56 pm
For all we know, philosopher made a very significant change to the arguments.
Defending an argument requires maintaining its actual structure.
Therefore, we sort of suspect, without proving anything, that philosopher failed to defend the arguments.

Was that too subtle for you?
Yes, I'd like you to be more specific in future discussions.

But the logical structure in my example is nevertheless the same as the original.

FlashDangerpants
Posts: 1696
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by FlashDangerpants » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:06 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:40 pm
FlashDangerpants wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 12:49 am
perhaps the author intends to reveal that he thinks one of these false syllogisms is fundamental to something we all believe. So by dismissing them we discover that we don't really believe in science or rainbows or something.
Or the other way around.
EB
You're obviously getting no takers among the clever people, and I'm bored of teasing philosopher now. Perhaps you should let us see your dastardly plan?

Atla
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Atla » Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:28 am

Speakpigeon wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 6:34 pm
This is a poll on the validity of the two following arguments.

1st argument
P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.
2nd argument
P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of some part of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of some part of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.
The first one is more simple but their logical structure is partially the same.

Comments are welcome, but please try to answer the poll before posting any comment.

Two answers overall, but one answer only for each argument. And you will be able to change your vote later if you want.

Thanks,
EB
"State" is usually a concept used in all kinds of analysis, but what does it even mean when it comes to philosophy, ontology?

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Speakpigeon » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:17 pm

Atla wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:28 am
"State" is usually a concept used in all kinds of analysis, but what does it even mean when it comes to philosophy, ontology?
???
There is an argument, couched in clear, everyday English, and I'm definite there's nothing not to understand, either in the wording or in the phrasing.
So, since you don't understand what the word "state" means here, I'm not going to be even interested to know anything else as to your views.
Whenever you think you have a point, make sure you do.
And if you have a point, sure, I'll be motivated to give you more life-fulfilling answer.
So, in other words, it's up to you.
EB

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Speakpigeon » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:28 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:39 pm
I'd like to start all over:

P1 - For all we know, A may be the state of B;
P2 - What C does is determined by the state of B;
C - Therefore, for all we know, what C does may be determined by A.


This is how I came to the conclusion that the argument is true:

Example:

C is the object (cube) that can do "something" (rotate or move along X-axis) in a 3D-space.
B is a checkbox in C's properties with 2 options - move or rotate.
A is the value of B - Move/Rotate.

Re-phrased it will sound like this:

P1 - The checkbox B has a value A which is Rotate.
P2 - What the object C does is determined by the value of B.
C - Therefore, what C does is dermined by the A - it rotates.

Where's the flaws?
That's absolutely excellent. This is exactly what is required.
To assess possibility, you need to do two things.
The first, you just did it. You just find a concrete and convincing example of how both premises could be true. This allows your intuitions to step in and tell you whether the conclusion is possibly true in this case, which is the point.
Second, you could try to prove the argument not valid, i.e. an example of how the premises would be true and the conclusion false.
Me, I have no idea how one could do that and I certainly haven't seen anyone doing it. There's a Nobel prize waiting for you if you can do it, if that can motivate you to try.
There have been quite a few people claiming the argument not valid but none has been able to produce any proof so far. Lots of tantrums, no substance.
EB

Atla
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Atla » Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:49 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:17 pm
Atla wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:28 am
"State" is usually a concept used in all kinds of analysis, but what does it even mean when it comes to philosophy, ontology?
???
There is an argument, couched in clear, everyday English, and I'm definite there's nothing not to understand, either in the wording or in the phrasing.
So, since you don't understand what the word "state" means here, I'm not going to be even interested to know anything else as to your views.
Whenever you think you have a point, make sure you do.
And if you have a point, sure, I'll be motivated to give you more life-fulfilling answer.
So, in other words, it's up to you.
EB
Very well, if I interpret "state" the way I think you interpret it (some specific abstraction about similar objects or something), then I guess both arguments are valid. (Apart from the small problem that abstractions don't really determine anything so P2 is kinda gibberish.)

If I mean something very general, for example "state of B" means that something exists, then the arguments hardly make sense, the second one especially not since B has no parts.

I guess. Overall I just see a mess of mixing abstracta with concreta, and using words with multiple relevant meanings.

User avatar
Speakpigeon
Posts: 957
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:20 pm
Location: Paris, France, EU

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Speakpigeon » Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:18 pm

Here are a few examples of states from a search engine, as commonly understood:
The state of the economy.
A quantum state.
The state of the union (address).
The state of affairs.
The state of the world today.
We observe the state of the system every hour.
We observe regularly the state of the bed of the river.
So, you just as good as asserted that a quantum state doesn't determine anything. Whoa. Tell QM physicists immediately.
You as good as asserted that the state of the economy doesn't determine anything. OK, good to know. It's not the economy, stupid.
You as good as asserted that the state of the bed of the river doesn't determine anything. So, why bother observing it regularly?
You as good as asserted that the state of the state of the world does determine anything. That will be a relief for all of us.
So, if I say, "A may be the state of B", what's there not to be understood?
Apparently, everything, at least if you put your heart into it.
EB

Atla
Posts: 2292
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Poll on the validity of two arguments

Post by Atla » Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:40 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:18 pm
Here are a few examples of states from a search engine, as commonly understood:
The state of the economy.
A quantum state.
The state of the union (address).
The state of affairs.
The state of the world today.
We observe the state of the system every hour.
We observe regularly the state of the bed of the river.
So, you just as good as asserted that a quantum state doesn't determine anything. Whoa. Tell QM physicists immediately.
You as good as asserted that the state of the economy doesn't determine anything. OK, good to know. It's not the economy, stupid.
You as good as asserted that the state of the bed of the river doesn't determine anything. So, why bother observing it regularly?
You as good as asserted that the state of the state of the world does determine anything. That will be a relief for all of us.
So, if I say, "A may be the state of B", what's there not to be understood?
Apparently, everything, at least if you put your heart into it.
EB
This is the most ironical comment I've read in a while. :) You've described in detail how we can interpret "state" in at least a dozen different ways, and that you really fail to grasp that state is just an abstraction, at least when you are using it in a formal logic argument. That's my point.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests