Logical Fallacies

The Game Show problem, logical fallacies, Marilyn's daily diet, multi-tasking and achieving your potential.

Moderator: Marilyn

Brilliant

Postby bill » Sat Aug 16, 2008 8:29 am

Brilliant Marilyn :wink: :wink: :wink: (I happen to think you deserve, nay need, a good winking) To the rest of you folks wondering what all the winking is about, it's an inside joke between me and Marilyn.

I have been in court often enough to know that neither most lawyers nor judges know anything about logic.

I saw one retort from a mathematician -just a glance- and although he is correct about other logics the basal foundations of logic were developed from oral arguments and then transformed into a mathematical binary logic system through the use of true/false statements to prove geometric arguments if my memory of history serves me correctly. I may have it in reverse order as I sometimes do.

Tell Elmo -short for Eldon Moritz- he is clueless. Elmo send Marilyn the check or a canceled check proving you paid your debt.

Obviously Niles and Stardust need to go over your incorrect use -thereby making you correct- of reductio ad absurdum !!
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

By the way

Postby bill » Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:51 am

People please write more carefully. Read and edit what you are saying or you will subject yourself to logical fallacies.

For example Lee wrote about causation, correlation, and equation. Equation is congruent to causation and therefore a superfluous term.

The scientific method:

1. Study nature empirically.
2. Statistically analyze the data to find a correlation.
3. From this correlation establish an equation.
4. From this equation predictions are made.
5. Further observations (and designed experiments) are made to see if the equation makes correct predictions.
6. If the equation does not make correct predictions then it is either incorrect or incomplete.
7. To correct or complete the equation further empirical studies are done and the process is repeated.

Most equations turn out to be correct but incomplete. For example Newtons laws of motion -equations- made correct predictions about the motions of the planets but were incomplete due too anomalies observed.
Einsteins Theory of Relativity explained some of these anomalies but predicted others. Evidence of these other anomalies were discovered and therefore proved Einsteins equations correct. But his equations were also found to be incomplete. I have proven that there is no one complete equation (The Theory of Everything) but an infinite matrix of equations.

"Mother" nature is as complex as women. Men are simple.

By the way I have also proven that planetary motion is both circular and elliptical -neither theory was complete in and of itself- the Greek astronomers were therefore correct according to the empirical evidence they had observed.

I have also proven Einsteins equation E=MC^2 incorrect. Question: Can you/anyone tell me why it is incorrect and not incomplete from the above essay?

If not your reading comprehension is low.

Comprehension: One of many true tests of intelligence.

Anyone who can answer the question posed above, correctly, proves themselves to be highly intelligent :shock: :shock: :shock: :!: :!: :!:
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

Love it

Postby kelly » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:41 am

Nice.

That isn't how i learned scientific methoid.

Courts are rather fallable logically, because personality counts. :wink:

They are based on Ad Hominum.

Yea - everyone knows that C's aren't square.

I have the one equation. the matrix is the fourth dimention.
kelly
Intellectual
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: SE Michigan

Postby Elmo » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:00 pm

Bill said, "Tell Elmo he's clueless."

Bill, if you wish to tell Elmo anything, tell him yourself. My email is elmoritz@yahoo.com.

I don't owe money. I offered to send money if my argument is wrong. So far, she hasn't even noticed that I have an argument.

Eldon
Challenged Marilyn in 1997 on the sex of the other sibling question. Told her I would put $1000 into her favorite charity if my argument was wrong. She said, "You're wrong, send the money to the American Heart Association."
Elmo
Intellectual
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:42 pm
Location: Abilene Texas

Sigh

Postby kelly » Wed Oct 08, 2008 12:54 pm

Again:

It's called a joke - it is something that nonautistic people do. :wink:
kelly
Intellectual
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: SE Michigan

Postby robert 46 » Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:57 am

Elmo wrote:I don't owe money. I offered to send money if my argument is wrong. So far, she hasn't even noticed that I have an argument.

Eldon


If you want to comment on the Two Children Puzzle you can post to the topic of that name in the Magazine Column forum, or the alternate topic "Marilyn's previous analysis, was it complete?". But don't expect a reply from Bill. He either is deliberately not posting here, or has been cut off from this website, or is currently incommunicado at some in-patient psychiatric facility. Who knows???
robert 46
Intellectual
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:21 am

Re: Sigh

Postby robert 46 » Wed Oct 15, 2008 12:09 pm

kelly wrote:Again:

It's called a joke - it is something that nonautistic people do. :wink:

I have read every post of Bill's which I could find, and can tell you for certain that his remarks to Eldon were not meant to be taken as a joke.

Bill was convinced you were a sixteen year old girl, but you say you are a forty year old man. However, you also have said that you believe in Santa Claus and talk to unicorns, so you generally act like a silly ten year old. You treat everything as if it was a joke: including job responsibility.

Most visitors probably see your posts differently from you. It's called inanity - it is something that addlepated people do.
robert 46
Intellectual
 
Posts: 2841
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:21 am

Re: Logical Fallacies

Postby nintendo1889 » Fri Jan 02, 2009 2:20 am

Marilyn wrote:And in the notorious fallacy of non sequitur, the conclusion doesn’t follow from the argument, as in this example: “Because fish have gills and birds have wings, because dinosaurs are extinct and snakes are not, because the duckbilled platypus and the spiny anteater have characteristics of both reptiles and mammals, because animals need the waste products of plant respiration to survive and plants need the waste products of animal respiration, because plenty of plants need insects for fertilization but earthworms don’t even need another earthworm, because dolphins are intelligent and whales can sing, because crustaceans look so much like big bugs and primates look so much like humans, and because nearly every meat on the planet doesn’t taste all that much different from chicken, the theory of evolution is correct.” That just doesn't follow!


That's a beautiful way of showing evolution may not be correct. If we evolved from lower life forms, then where are the intermediate life forms between us and the primates around today? In other words, the gap of intelligence between us an them is so great, but, according to the darwinian theory, would the evolutionary generation closest to us in intelligence have won out against the monkeys we have now?


Also it seems more and more that successful executives are criminals, and it seems to be getting harder to be a successful executive without being criminal.
Surrender Dorothy!
nintendo1889
Thinker
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:56 pm

Postby bill » Sun Sep 13, 2009 5:26 pm

Rob She writes like a sixteen year old girl. I never said I was convinced she was. You put your conclusion about my observation into your post. Obviously you read it and then change it to your liking.
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

Re: Logical Fallacies

Postby davar55 » Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:15 am

nintendo1889 wrote:
Marilyn wrote:And in the notorious fallacy of non sequitur, the conclusion doesn’t follow from the argument, as in this example: “Because fish have gills and birds have wings, because dinosaurs are extinct and snakes are not, because the duckbilled platypus and the spiny anteater have characteristics of both reptiles and mammals, because animals need the waste products of plant respiration to survive and plants need the waste products of animal respiration, because plenty of plants need insects for fertilization but earthworms don’t even need another earthworm, because dolphins are intelligent and whales can sing, because crustaceans look so much like big bugs and primates look so much like humans, and because nearly every meat on the planet doesn’t taste all that much different from chicken, the theory of evolution is correct.” That just doesn't follow!


That's a beautiful way of showing evolution may not be correct. If we evolved from lower life forms, then where are the intermediate life forms between us and the primates around today? In other words, the gap of intelligence between us an them is so great, but, according to the darwinian theory, would the evolutionary generation closest to us in intelligence have won out against the monkeys we have now?


Also it seems more and more that successful executives are criminals, and it seems to be getting harder to be a successful executive without being criminal.



Marilyn is just demonstrating a certain logical fallacy.
I'm sure she defends the theory of evolution, as any scientist must.
davar55
Intellectual
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: New York City

Postby bill » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:30 am

He (Nintendo) did say MAY be which to me implies he agrees with it (Darwin's theory).
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

Re: Logical Fallacies

Postby Kemosabe-TBC » Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:43 am

davar55 wrote:Marilyn is just demonstrating a certain logical fallacy.
I'm sure she defends the theory of evolution, as any scientist must.

Must? Why? It's a theory. Every scientist should strive to prove a theory is correct or incorrect. Not believe in a theory without questioning it. That's not science, that's blind faith.
Kemosabe-TBC
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1268
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: Portugal

Postby bill » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:18 am

Nice point Kemo that is a good point for a Tonto.

Your friend

Bill Tonto
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

Re: Logical Fallacies

Postby davar55 » Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:08 pm

Kemosabe-TBC wrote:
davar55 wrote:Marilyn is just demonstrating a certain logical fallacy.
I'm sure she defends the theory of evolution, as any scientist must.

Must? Why? It's a theory. Every scientist should strive to prove a theory is correct or incorrect. Not believe in a theory without questioning it. That's not science, that's blind faith.


Evolution is far and away the best explanation for all
biological origins and interconnections. I didn't say accept
by blind faith, I said defend.
davar55
Intellectual
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: New York City

Postby bill » Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:52 pm

Good I hope everyone learns to read more carefully from this discussion.

Bill :D :D :D
love creation machine
bill
Intellectual
 
Posts: 1262
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 2:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Online Articles By Marilyn

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron