Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Is the argument sound?

Poll ended at Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:55 pm

No
2
67%
Yes
0
No votes
I don't know
0
No votes
The argument doesn't make sense
1
33%
 
Total votes: 3

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

Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Speakpigeon » Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:55 pm

This thread is a poll on the soundness of a logical argument.
Here is the argument:
For all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea;
What the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea;
Therefore, for all we know, what the buoy does may be determined by a wave.
Is this argument sound?
Thank you to vote before posting any comment here.
You will be able to change your vote if need be.
EB

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by FlashDangerpants » Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:58 pm

An argument can be composed of three sentences.
Three correct sentences can be placed close to each other and mention related things.
If three sentences that mention similar things are placed next to each other, they may or may not constitute an actual argument.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:25 am

Speakpigeon wrote:
Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:55 pm
This thread is a poll on the soundness of a logical argument.
Here is the argument:
For all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea;
What the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea;
Therefore, for all we know, what the buoy does may be determined by a wave.
Is this argument sound?
Thank you to vote before posting any comment here.
You will be able to change your vote if need be.
EB
Is there a poll on soundness?

Skip
Posts: 2551
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Skip » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:35 am

sounds wet

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Speakpigeon » Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:20 pm

This thread is a poll on the soundness of a logical argument.
Here is the argument:
For all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea;
What the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea;
Therefore, for all we know, what the buoy does may be determined by a wave.
Is this argument sound?
Thank you to vote before posting any comment here.
You will be able to change your vote if need be.
EB

surreptitious57
Posts: 3443
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by surreptitious57 » Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:29 am


An argument has a definitive conclusion to it but that one does not so its not an argument as such

Skip
Posts: 2551
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 1:34 pm

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Skip » Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:10 am

This guy doesn't seem to know what a buoy is or what it's supposed to do or even whether there are waves in the sea.
What qualifies him to argue about it?
Not like it was all that controversial in the first place...

Walker
Posts: 6813
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Walker » Thu Jan 24, 2019 5:15 am

The word "maybe" dilutes it to unsoundness.

"For all we know," contributes to the flabbiness.

“If” also contributes to unsound reporting of reality.

Example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4B1xN6NWE8

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:01 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:29 am

An argument has a definitive conclusion to it but that one does not so its not an argument as such
The definitive conclusion is that therefore, for all we know, what the buoy does may be determined by a wave.
EB

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:04 pm

Skip wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:10 am
This guy doesn't seem to know what a buoy is or what it's supposed to do or even whether there are waves in the sea.
What qualifies him to argue about it?
Not like it was all that controversial in the first place...
This thread is explicitly about the soundness of the argument, not the soundness of Speakpigeon.
If you can't get yourself to address the topic, go play in the courtyard.
EB

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Speakpigeon » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:11 pm

Walker wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 5:15 am
The word "maybe" dilutes it to unsoundness.
"For all we know," contributes to the flabbiness.
“If” also contributes to unsound reporting of reality.
There's just one way to assess soundness and it is as follows:
An argument is “sound” if it is valid and the premises are true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive ... _soundness
So:
- Is it true or not that for all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea?
- Is it true or not that what the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea?
That's all there is to it.
So, spare me your idiotic comments.
EB

surreptitious57
Posts: 3443
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by surreptitious57 » Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:49 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
An argument has a definitive conclusion to it but that one does not so its not an argument as such
The definitive conclusion is that therefore for all we know what the buoy does may be determined by a wave
The phrase for all we know is the opposite of definitive and so the conclusion cannot be described as such

Walker
Posts: 6813
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Walker » Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:19 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:11 pm
Walker wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 5:15 am
The word "maybe" dilutes it to unsoundness.
"For all we know," contributes to the flabbiness.
“If” also contributes to unsound reporting of reality.
There's just one way to assess soundness and it is as follows:
An argument is “sound” if it is valid and the premises are true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive ... _soundness
So:
- Is it true or not that for all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea?
- Is it true or not that what the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea?
That's all there is to it.
So, spare me your idiotic comments.
EB
Maybe

From a premise as foggy as a wet fart ye seek definitive but will find only flapdoodle.

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

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by FlashDangerpants » Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:39 pm

Speakpigeon wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:11 pm
There's just one way to assess soundness and it is as follows:
An argument is “sound” if it is valid and the premises are true.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deductive_reasoning#Validity_and_soundness
So:
- Is it true or not that for all we know, a wave may be the state of some water in the sea?
- Is it true or not that what the buoy does is determined by the state of some water in the sea?
That's all there is to it.
So, spare me your idiotic comments.
EB
Sure those statements are true. But it makes no difference because this statement is true with or without them.
- for all we know, what the buoy does may be determined by a wave.

Deductive validity can only apply to deductions. Putting "therefore" in front of a statement that is true in it's own right does not make it a deduction from previous statements. That is an act of blatant misdirection.

If you want your collection of statements to add up to a deductive argument that could be valid you must formulate it such that the conclusion is dependent on the premises.

Logik
Posts: 4041
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2018 12:48 pm

Re: Poll on the soundness of an argument about what a buoy does

Post by Logik » Thu Jan 24, 2019 3:12 pm

FlashDangerpants wrote:
Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:39 pm
If you want your collection of statements to add up to a deductive argument that could be valid you must formulate it such that the conclusion is dependent on the premises.
That is necessary but insufficient.

You must also structure the argument in such a way so that it's impossible for the conclusion to be false when the premises are true.

As soon as you produce such an argument, please claim your Nobel Prize in Physics for having discovered The Theory of Everything.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests