A simple logical reasoning test
Who_Am_I wrote:
Rewrite:
In this test, "No" will be taken to mean "definitely not". For example, in the first part, "No" would mean "It is definitely true that some y are not x". "Not enough information" means "it may be true, but we can't tell from the information provided". For example, in the first "Not enough information" means "It may be true that all y are x, but there is insufficient information to tell"
Does B follow from A, if A is accepted as true?
A: Some x are y.
B. All x are y.
1. Yes.
2. No.
3. Not enough information.
In this test, "No" will be taken to mean "definitely not". For example, in the first part, "No" would mean "It is definitely true that some y are not x". "Not enough information" means "it may be true, but we can't tell from the information provided". For example, in the first "Not enough information" means "It may be true that all y are x, but there is insufficient information to tell"
Does B follow from A, if A is accepted as true?
A: Some x are y.
B. All x are y.
1. Yes.
2. No.
3. Not enough information.
It still doesn't quite make sense. Either B follows from A, or it doesn't. There is no such thing as "not enough information" when it comes to the question of whether B follows from A.
I think that your three options should be:
1. B follows from A.
2. NOT B follows from A.
3. Neither B nor NOT B follows from A.
Another way to put it would be like this:
1. A implies B.
2. A implies NOT B.
3. A does not imply B, and A does not imply NOT B.
Yet another way to put it would be like this:
1. If A is true, then B must be true.
2. If A is true, then B must be false.
3. If A is true, then it is possible for B to be true, and it is also possible for B to be false.
Quote:
you could just send the OP a PM and ask if you are one of the offending members.
Yes, 70 000 members will PM him to ask if they are on the list. How handy Not sure WP server could take it
Who_Am_I - no problem I am very patient
And add to your answer why do you mock someone who can't get laid?
Who_Am_I wrote:
Yes, this is relevant to this section.
Premise: Most x are y.
Conclusion: Therefore, all x are y.
Is this
A. True
B. False
C. Not enough information to tell.
Premise: Almost all x are y.
Conclusion: Therefore, some x are not y.
Is this
A. True
B. False
C. Not enough information to tell.
Premise A: Most x are y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
Is this
A. True.
B. False.
C. Not enough information to tell.
Premise: Most x are y.
Conclusion: Therefore, all x are y.
Is this
A. True
B. False
C. Not enough information to tell.
Premise: Almost all x are y.
Conclusion: Therefore, some x are not y.
Is this
A. True
B. False
C. Not enough information to tell.
Premise A: Most x are y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
Is this
A. True.
B. False.
C. Not enough information to tell.
The answer in EVERY case is C (not enough information).
Essentially your making the same statement over and over again: most X is Y, A is X, therefore A is Y.
In each case youve told us that "most" of X is Y.
You dont tell us anything about the minority of X that are not known to be Y- whether they are just not known to be Y or whether they are infact KNOWN not to be Y.
So in each case the answer has to be "not enough data to make a judgment".
So tell us the answer and tell us wtf this all has to do with dating and romance?
i_Am_andaJoy
Supporting Member
Joined: 27 Sep 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,268
Location: Ocala, FL
aSKperger wrote:
And add to your answer why do you mock someone who can't get laid?
Hey, if they can't take it online, they are certainly not going to handle it well in the bedroom.
So obviously, any mocking on my part would be out of the kindness of my heart.
Gotta thicken up the poor guy's... skin.
_________________
www.asaspiepie.blogspot.com
Even in his lowest swoop, the mountain eagle is still higher than the other birds upon the plain, even though they soar. --Herman Melville
Blownmind wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
Premise A: Most x are y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
If the word "Therefore" hadn't been there, it could have been "Not enough information to tell", but as it stands now, it is "False", and "Premise C" is actually a conclusion(which makes it false).
Perhaps you really meant for the word "Therefore" to never have been there in the first place?
Agreed. Seems basic enough.
_________________
INTJ
bizboy1 wrote:
Blownmind wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
Premise A: Most x are y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
If the word "Therefore" hadn't been there, it could have been "Not enough information to tell", but as it stands now, it is "False", and "Premise C" is actually a conclusion(which makes it false).
Perhaps you really meant for the word "Therefore" to never have been there in the first place?
Agreed. Seems basic enough.
The first problem is that, for me at least, the statement
Quote:
Therefore B.
is not quite the same thing as the statement
Quote:
The preceding statement implies that B is true.
The word "therefore" is a logical connective between statements, and it is not appropriate to use it unless the preceding statement implies the current one, but it does not really affect the truth-value of the statement in which it appears. For example, consider the following two statements:
Quote:
Cats are mammals.
On the other hand, cats are mammals.
On the other hand, cats are mammals.
Could you really say that the second statement is "false" simply because the phrase "on the other hand" is not appropriate?
The second problem is that if we interpret "false" to mean "A does not imply B", then there is no possible use for the answer "not enough information". You always have enough information to determine whether or not A implies B.
i_Am_andaJoy wrote:
aSKperger wrote:
And add to your answer why do you mock someone who can't get laid?
Hey, if they can't take it online, they are certainly not going to handle it well in the bedroom.
So obviously, any mocking on my part would be out of the kindness of my heart.
Gotta thicken up the poor guy's... skin.
Benevolent discord, I call it. Criticism isn't the end of the world; it can be the beginning of a new one, though.
Declension wrote:
bizboy1 wrote:
Blownmind wrote:
Who_Am_I wrote:
Premise A: Most x are y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
Premise B: C is an x.
Premise C: Therefore, C is a y.
If the word "Therefore" hadn't been there, it could have been "Not enough information to tell", but as it stands now, it is "False", and "Premise C" is actually a conclusion(which makes it false).
Perhaps you really meant for the word "Therefore" to never have been there in the first place?
Agreed. Seems basic enough.
The first problem is that, for me at least, the statement
Quote:
Therefore B.
is not quite the same thing as the statement
Quote:
The preceding statement implies that B is true.
The word "therefore" is a logical connective between statements, and it is not appropriate to use it unless the preceding statement implies the current one, but it does not really affect the truth-value of the statement in which it appears. For example, consider the following two statements:
Quote:
Cats are mammals.
On the other hand, cats are mammals.
On the other hand, cats are mammals.
Could you really say that the second statement is "false" simply because the phrase "on the other hand" is not appropriate?
The second problem is that if we interpret "false" to mean "A does not imply B", then there is no possible use for the answer "not enough information". You always have enough information to determine whether or not A implies B.
I didn't read his whole answer. I just think it's false. Isn't it an invalid argument? I also know there are mistakes in his post but I just assumed what I think he meant.
_________________
INTJ
Declension wrote:
The second problem is that if we interpret "false" to mean "A does not imply B", then there is no possible use for the answer "not enough information". You always have enough information to determine whether or not A implies B.
I believe false would mean that the statement is definitively not true - the opposite of true. Your definition sounds more like "it may or may not be true, but it is not implied", but the concept of false does not allow for this (at least not in formal logic).
1.B 2.A 3.C
_________________
Your Aspie score is 193 of 200
Your neurotypical score is 40 of 200
You are very likely an aspie
No matter where I go I will always be a Gaijin even at home. Like Anime? https://kissanime.to/AnimeList
aSKperger wrote:
Quote:
you could just send the OP a PM and ask if you are one of the offending members.
Yes, 70 000 members will PM him to ask if they are on the list. How handy Not sure WP server could take it
Who_Am_I - no problem I am very patient
And add to your answer why do you mock someone who can't get laid?
i don't think that many members think they could be the culprit.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
bizboy1 wrote:
I really don't see the point of this thread. I'm sure someone while criticize me for saying that.
why isn't there a point to this thread? perhaps if you gave a reason, people would be less likely to criticise your response.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105
Blownmind wrote:
Teredia wrote:
Blownmind wrote:
...saying a 10-year-old child...?
ill clear this up as the grade 12 was my post (pages ago). I was a highschool drop out who grew up in the bottom level of schooling zones in Australia, because my parents could not afford better schooling. I was doing an adult education, and that was grade 11/12 in the one year... not everyone is able to afford the same education as everyone else, please be more considerate of others!! !
Yes s/he should be more considerate.
Good for you that you got it completed at a later stage in life, I admire that.
Thank you Blownmind =)
Quote:
Hey, if they can't take it online, they are certainly not going to handle it well in the bedroom. Laughing
So obviously, any mocking on my part would be out of the kindness of my heart.
Gotta thicken up the poor guy's... skin.
Benevolent discord, I call it. Criticism isn't the end of the world; it can be the beginning of a new one, though.
So obviously, any mocking on my part would be out of the kindness of my heart.
Gotta thicken up the poor guy's... skin.
Benevolent discord, I call it. Criticism isn't the end of the world; it can be the beginning of a new one, though.
hyperlexian - are you ok with this. Is this ok according by site rules? Humiliation of this calibre?!
I'm not mocking people for not being able to get laid. You're reading a lot into what I say that isn't actually there, aSKsperger.
_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I