Page 1 of 24

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:12 pm
by Logik
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...

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:26 pm
by Atla
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...
Actually, it goes like this:

Premise 1. John is human ( A ∈ C )
Premise 2. Jane is human ( B ∈ C )

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:30 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:26 pm
Actually, it goes like this:

Premise 1. John is human ( A ∈ C )
Premise 2. Jane is human ( B ∈ C )

Yes, that's how you would avoid the problem, but you have just introduced an ambiguity in the verb "is".

The sky is blue. A ∈ C
The light is off. B ∈ D

Don't think so ;)

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:33 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:30 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:26 pm
Actually, it goes like this:

Premise 1. John is human ( A ∈ C )
Premise 2. Jane is human ( B ∈ C )
There are not many non-logicians who would translate "is" as "∈"

The sky is blue.
The TV is off.
Almost everyone translates "is" as "∈" in such a context. That's how the human brain usually works.

Your brain doesn't seem to process context however, so you will never understand English. You are one of the few exceptions (as I already mentioned a few dozen times).

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:36 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:33 pm
Almost everyone translates "is" as "∈" in such a context. That's how the human brain usually works.

Your brain doesn't seem to process context however, so you will never understand English. You are one of the few exceptions (as I already mentioned a few dozen times).
Obviously that's what everybody does!

I am merely pointing out that you aren't solving the problem - you have just moved it elsewhere!
You have made a grammatical error.

You have used the word 'is' in two different senses within the same sentence.

And in the spirit of 'moving problems rather than fixing them' you switch contexts. Because that's the only way to explain why the verb 'is" is overloaded.

For somebody who claims to reject dualism, you sure don't mind dualistic language and pluralistic contexts.

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:46 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:36 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:33 pm
Almost everyone translates "is" as "∈" in such a context. That's how the human brain usually works.

Your brain doesn't seem to process context however, so you will never understand English. You are one of the few exceptions (as I already mentioned a few dozen times).
Obviously that's what everybody does!

I am merely pointing out that you aren't solving the problem - you have just moved it elsewhere!
You have made a grammatical error.

You have used the word 'is' in two different senses within the same sentence.

And in the spirit of 'moving problems rather than fixing them' you switch contexts. Because that's the only way to explain why the verb 'is" is overloaded.

For somebody who claims to reject dualism, you sure don't mind dualistic language and pluralistic contexts.
There is no problem. You don't know this about humans, but almost everyone else's brains automatically make the same context switches. It's how we process a language like English.

There is only a problem for those whose brains don't do this.

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:48 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:46 pm
There is no problem. You don't know this about humans, but almost everyone else's brains automatically make the same context switches. It's how we process a language like English.
OBVIOUSLY.

I am merely pointing out that ambiguity is the root-cause of context-switching.

If you hadn't overloaded the meaning of the word "is" you wouldn't have to context-switch...

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:52 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:48 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:46 pm
There is no problem. You don't know this about humans, but almost everyone else's brains automatically make the same context switches. It's how we process a language like English.
OBVIOUSLY.

I am merely pointing out that ambiguity is the root-cause of context-switching.

If you hadn't overloaded the meaning of the word "is" you wouldn't have to context-switch...
I wouldn't call it ambiguity or overloading, nor is that really a cause. But it must seem like that to you.

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:54 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:52 pm
I wouldn't call it ambiguity or overloading, nor is that really a cause. But it must seem like that to you.
You wouldn't call it overloading but a linguist would.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_overload
In linguistics, semantic overload occurs when a word or phrase has more than one meaning, and is used in ways that convey meaning based on its divergent constituent concepts
In the CONTEXT of this argument the word "is" has two different meanings.
P1. John is human.
P2. Jane is human.
C. John is Jane
It's one argument.
One context.
Why are you context-switching?

Did you choose to or did you have to?

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:57 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:54 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:52 pm
I wouldn't call it ambiguity or overloading, nor is that really a cause. But it must seem like that to you.
You wouldn't call it overloading but a linguist would.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_overload
In linguistics, semantic overload occurs when a word or phrase has more than one meaning, and is used in ways that convey meaning based on its divergent constituent concepts
In the CONTEXT of this argument the word "is" has two different meanings.
P1. John is human.
P2. Jane is human.
C. John is Jane
No, here it isn't "used in ways that convey meaning based on its divergent constituent concepts", because here almost everyone understands how to process each sentence.

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:58 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:57 pm
No, here it isn't "used in ways that convey meaning based on its divergent constituent concepts", because here almost everyone understands how to process each sentence.

*sigh

P1 A = B
P2 B = C
C. A = C

Why aren't you context-switching here?

Silly dualist. There is only one context! It's called The Universe.

If you are context-switching (in order to avoid inconsistencies) you are not a monist. FIx your language ;)

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:02 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:58 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 6:57 pm
No, here it isn't "used in ways that convey meaning based on its divergent constituent concepts", because here almost everyone understands how to process each sentence.

*sigh

A = B
B = C
A = C

Why aren't you context-switching here?

Silly dualist. There is only one context! It's called The Universe.

If you are context-switching (in order to avoid inconsistencies) you are not a monist.
Because this is just formal logic now, which doesn't really have contexts.

All this has nothing to do with monism or dualism (I'm neither btw).

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:03 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:02 pm
All this has nothing to do with monism or dualism (I'm neither btw).
Maybe I am not using the same word you use but I think our conceptions are the same.

I've seen you argue against mind-independence (against the dualism of the Cartesian theatre).

Because the Cartesian theater splits the world into two contexts.
Never mind the world - you've split up a 3-line argument into two contexts.

If formal logic doesn't have contexts then why did you have to context-switch?

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:09 pm
by Atla
Logik wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:03 pm
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:02 pm
All this has nothing to do with monism or dualism (I'm neither btw).
Maybe I am not using the same word you use but I think our conceptions are the same.

I've seen you argue against mind-independence (against the dualism of the Cartesian theatre).

Because the Cartesian theater splits the world into two contexts.
Never mind the world - you've split up a 3-line argument into two contexts.
What lies beyond monism is pretty off topic here.

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

Posted: Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:10 pm
by Logik
Atla wrote:
Fri Feb 22, 2019 7:09 pm
What lies beyond monism is pretty off topic here.
OK. but you aren't beyond monism.

You are on the wrong side of Cartesian dualism.

You can't even read a 3 line argument without splitting it into parts.
You'll probably turn the universe into chopped mince.