Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Sculptor
Posts: 2129
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Logik wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:12 pm Premise 1. John is human ( A = C )
Premise 2. Jane is human ( B = C )

By the transitive property: John is Jane (A = B)

You can now go and blame Aristotle for identity politics...
This is bollucks
Premise 1 implies C=A, if you take "=" to mean equals.
Yet premise one means that A is an example of C, not that it is the same as C.
Human is not equal to John; Human is not equal to Jane. So Jane and John though they are both human are not the same as each other, except in respect of being human.
Skepdick
Posts: 4760
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:56 pm This is bollucks
Premise 1 implies C=A, if you take "=" to mean equals.
Yet premise one means that A is an example of C, not that it is the same as C.
Human is not equal to John; Human is not equal to Jane. So Jane and John though they are both human are not the same as each other, except in respect of being human.
OK. Go ahead and formalize the English sentence "A is an example of C" using classical logic.
Sculptor
Posts: 2129
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Skepdick wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:00 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:56 pm This is bollucks
Premise 1 implies C=A, if you take "=" to mean equals.
Yet premise one means that A is an example of C, not that it is the same as C.
Human is not equal to John; Human is not equal to Jane. So Jane and John though they are both human are not the same as each other, except in respect of being human.
OK. Go ahead and formalize the English sentence "A is an example of C" using classical logic.
The "=" symbol has different contextual meanings. In the case of John = human in your example is obviously too difficult for you to understand.
The problem is in your mind, open it up a little.

In computer language you can quite legitimately have
A=10
A=30
A=40
with no problem.
People know what it means, and live with it.
Skepdick
Posts: 4760
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm In computer language you can quite legitimately have
A=10
A=30
A=40
with no problem.
The assignment operator does not allow for A to be 10, 30 and 40 at the same time.
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm People know what it means, and live with it.
You are merely making the OP's point. You are not a Classical logician.

You are content with equivocation and turn a blind eye to it.
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm The "=" symbol has different contextual meanings.
Q.E.D

Having "multiple contextual meanings" is called semantic overloading.
You can do it in programming languages via polymorphism.

You can't do polymorphism with Classical logic.
Sculptor
Posts: 2129
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Skepdick wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:06 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm In computer language you can quite legitimately have
A=10
A=30
A=40
with no problem.
The assignment operator does not allow for A to be 10, 30 and 40 at the same time.
DUH.
Computer programmes are algorithms, which are a sequence of events.
Originally the code would read LET A=10, LET A=30 etc.
For convenience the LET was dropped.
IN the same way with "Jane is Human", we all understand what it means.
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm People know what it means, and live with it.
You are merely making the OP's point. You are not a Classical logician.

You are content with equivocation and turn a blind eye to it.
There is no equivocation at all.
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm The "=" symbol has different contextual meanings.
Q.E.D

Having "multiple contextual meanings" is called semantic overloading.
You can do it in programming languages via polymorphism.

You can't do polymorphism with Classical logic.
Age
Posts: 4985
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Logik wrote: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:12 pm Premise 1. John is human ( A = C )
Premise 2. Jane is human ( B = C )

By the transitive property: John is Jane (A = B)

You can now go and blame Aristotle for identity politics...
If you want to see and understand the Truth of things, then 'you' have to look at and speak truth. Distorting truth will never help you to see any thing true.

Not just the words you say can effect the 'truth of things' so to can just a letter.

"John is human" is not truth. "John is a human" is speaking more truth.

Now, if "john is a human", and, "jane is a human" also, then they obviously are not necessarily the exact same thing.

Missing the words 'also' and 'a' obviously affects the actual truth of things

If A is a thing C, and so A is just ONE of C. And, B is a thing, ALSO, and so B is just ANOTHER ONE of C.
Then, instead of the conclusion A is B, which is obviously false, the truth is seen. A is obviously not (necessarily) B.

A and B are both just each an individual one of the group C.

If A is C, then nothing else could be C. A is not C. A is just a part of the group C.

Saying/writing the actual truth, instead of trying to distort things to suit one's own previously held distorted beliefs, allows the actual Truth of things to come to light and be revealed.

Saying "john (or jane) is a human" is the truth, but it is also just a part of thee Truth. When the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is spoken, then thee actual and real Truth of things is very easily seen, and understood.
surreptitious57
Posts: 4213
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Excellent point you have made there

And so this :

Premise I : John is human [ A = C ]
Premise 2 : Jane is human [ B = C ]

By the transitive property : John is Jane [ A = B ]

Becomes this :

Premise I : John is a human [ A = C ]
Premise 2 : Jane is also a human [ B = C ]

By the transitive property : John and Jane are both human [ A = B ]
Skepdick
Posts: 4760
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:05 pm There is no equivocation at all.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

1. calling two different things by the same name
2. the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm The "=" symbol has different contextual meanings.
So you are using "=" in multiple senses? Yeah!

That you are ignorant is rather obvious, but ignorance can be cured if you can at least recognise you errors.

But you can't.
Sculptor
Posts: 2129
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Let me convince you that none of you are Classical logicians!

Skepdick wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 4:13 pm
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 10:05 pm There is no equivocation at all.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation

Wow - U iz all gwown up now you can quote Wiki. Ah Bless!

1. calling two different things by the same name
2. the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses
Sculptor wrote: Mon Aug 05, 2019 8:56 pm The "=" symbol has different contextual meanings.
So you are using "=" in multiple senses? Yeah!

That you are ignorant is rather obvious, but ignorance can be cured if you can at least recognise you errors.

But you can't.
Says the boy who put dick into sceptic