[W:444:664] Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

fact ( fakt) : something that is 'known' or 'proved' to be true. Can you and/or Angel 'prove' 'God exists' to be a 'factual' claim ?

The root meaning of the word "fact" is of something made. You can see this more clearly in the word "artifact." All facts are made up by the mind of man.

 

[Logician Man]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Angel and gfm make up their own definitions to words.

Yeah..I just tossed that one out there so one or both could dismiss dictionaries.... again

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Get with it, man! You've posted a dozen posts in this thread and not one is on point. All you post is personal grousing about me or gfm. If your such an expert on logic, let's hear you say something intelligible about logic.

Actually mine are all on point unlike yours where you just show your total lack of comprehension about logic

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

fact ( fakt) : something that is 'known' or 'proved' to be true.

That's not what a fact is... but okay, I'll play along with that definition for sake of discussion...

Can you and/or Angel 'prove' 'God exists' to be a 'factual' claim ?

No, neither Angel nor I can prove God exists. Neither Angel nor I even attempt to prove that God exists.

We believe that there is strong supporting evidence that suggests such existence, but no, there is no proof of it.

We both recognize the circular nature of Christianity (and religion in general)...

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Angel and gfm make up their own definitions to words.

Nope... we just recognize what the authoritative source for a word definition is... hint, it is NOT any dictionary or encyclopedia or website or article...

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Yeah..I just tossed that one out there so one or both could dismiss dictionaries.... again

I accept dictionaries just fine. They are quite useful for standardizing spelling and pronunciation of words... However, no dictionary is the authoritative source of any word definition... Those definitions come from things such as Philosophy, Logic, Science, Engineering, History, etc. etc.

 

[Logician Man]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

I accept dictionaries just fine. They are quite useful for standardizing spelling and pronunciation of words... However, no dictionary is the authoritative source of any word definition... Those definitions come from things such as Philosophy, Logic, Science, Engineering, History, etc. etc.

Incorrect

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Actually mine are all on point unlike yours where you just show your total lack of comprehension about logic

Personal grousing is not "on point"... speaking about logic is on point...

Speaking of which, this post of yours is an Inversion Fallacy because you are attempting to project your argumentation and misinformation faults onto Angel and I... That is an error of logic on your part, and a very common fallacy that people commit...

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Incorrect

This is another fallacy (error of logic) known as the Argument of the Stone Fallacy... This is when one rejects an argument as "absurd"/"stupid"/etc. without providing any counterargument.


You will also find that, if you choose to further this position of yours, you are actually arguing yourself into a paradox, which is another error of logic when one simultaneously argues for two opposing viewpoints...

Which dictionary is the "authoritative" dictionary when it comes to word definitions? You will find that dictionaries often contradict each other...

 

[Logician Man]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

This is another fallacy (error of logic) known as the Argument of the Stone Fallacy... This is when one rejects an argument as "absurd"/"stupid"/etc. without providing any counterargument.


You will also find that, if you choose to further this position of yours, you are actually arguing yourself into a paradox, which is another error of logic when one simultaneously argues for two opposing viewpoints...

Which dictionary is the "authoritative" dictionary when it comes to word definitions? You will find that dictionaries often contradict each other...

:angel?:

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

:angel?:

Ah, yes! The argument by emoji. A staple of faux skepticism.

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Nope... we just recognize what the authoritative source for a word definition is... hint, it is NOT any dictionary or encyclopedia or website or article...

Hint its not YOU

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Actually mine are all on point unlike yours where you just show your total lack of comprehension about logic

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

Faith is not a circular argument but you can make one based on faith.

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

Faith is not a circular argument but you can make one based on faith.

You didn't answer any of the questions in logic:

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

You didn't answer any of the questions in logic:

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

Faith is not a circular argument but you can make one based on faith.
gfms argument is false
And yes I have noticed you have tried to move the conversation away from your personal and unique definitions of words

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

Faith is not a circular argument but you can make one based on faith.
gfms argument is false
And yes I have noticed you have tried to move the conversation away from your personal and unique definitions of words

Answer the logic questions.
If you cannot answer the logic questions, you cannot validly criticize gfm7175's argument.

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Answer the logic questions.
If you cannot answer the logic questions, you cannot validly criticize gfm7175's argument.

Admit faith is not a circular argument or by failing to do so tacitly admit you have no clue what you are talking about

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

What fundamental principle of logic lies behind the following statement?
F(x) ⊃ F(x)
From that principle by what basic rule of inference is the above statement reached?

How is the logic involved in the above exercise related to gfm7175's argument for the circularity of all faith-based systems of belief?

Faith is not a circular argument but you can make one based on faith.
gfms argument is false
And yes I have noticed you have tried to move the conversation away from your personal and unique definitions of words

Answer the logic questions.
If you cannot answer the logic questions, you cannot validly criticize gfm7175's argument.

Admit faith is not a circular argument or by failing to do so tacitly admit you have no clue what you are talking about

Answer the logic questions or hold your peace about logic.
In simple and direct American: Put up or shut up!

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

:angel?:

Argumentum Ad Emoji dismissed on sight...

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Hint its not YOU

This would be the logical fallacy known as the Strawman Argument Fallacy. This is when one substitutes a person's actual position with a distorted/different position (typically one that is easier to counter).

I've never argued that I am an authoritative source for word definitions. I argued that Philosophy, Logic, Science, Engineering, etc. etc. are examples of authoritative sources for word definitions, as opposed to dictionaries/websites/magazines/encyclopedias/etc.

 

[gfm7175]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

gfms argument is false

Could you re-state my argument (or point me to the post # which I made it) and explain why it is false?

 

[RAMOSS]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Nope... we just recognize what the authoritative source for a word definition is... hint, it is NOT any dictionary or encyclopedia or website or article...

Well, that is not a true statement, since you keep on misusing terms.

 

[Quag]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Answer the logic questions or hold your peace about logic.
In simple and direct American: Put up or shut up!

Ok option B then you tactily admit you have no clue what you are talking about

 

[Angel]

Re: Logic 101: How To Properly Reason

Ok option B then you tactily admit you have no clue what you are talking about

I do believe the last dozen posts representing exchanges between you, gfm, and me have shown all that needs to be shown about who is and who isn't ready, willing and able to discuss logic in this thread about logic in the philosophy forum.

Peace out, Q.