Philosophy :facepalm

[9erempiree]

This course and subject matter is crap. You cannot teach people philosophy. It taught by one's self. 7 page papers for nothing and in class discussions lead to nothing but talking in circles.

Such an easy course for an intellect like myself.

:facepalm

[Nick Young]

dawg why would you enter in to such a useless course:facepalm

It must be full of a bunch of marxist dumbasses with neck beards.

I feel for you breh.

[Loneshot]

the point of a philosophy course is to discuss the ideas amongst others. the more minds, the more perspective, the greater the mind can expand.

[miller-time]

This course and subject matter is crap. You cannot teach people philosophy. It taught by one's self. 7 page papers for nothing and in class discussions lead to nothing but talking in circles.

Such an easy course for an intellect like myself.

:facepalm

For such a powerful intellect I'm surprised you didn't read the course description before you joined...

[Andrei89]

OP a ph4g0t as usual:applause:

[robert de niro]

a neckbeard thinking he's better than other neckbeards

[GimmeThat]

you can discuss the results of the children off of different principles

or you can dicuss different principles in itself and what are the best course of action in which a healthy children arrives.

[GimmeThat]

This course and subject matter is crap. You cannot teach people philosophy. It taught by one's self. 7 page papers for nothing and in class discussions lead to nothing but talking in circles.

Such an easy course for an intellect like myself.

:facepalm


most intellects have come to the conclusion of agreeing with me, or end up help supporting my point of view.

it's really just been a matter of how/why they do it.


Philosophy

[Frozen1]

26 years of watching NBA and still on college.

Well done.

[GimmeThat]

26 years of watching NBA and still on college.

Well done.

I might never see the day light again if cats and dogs got along with one another you know.

:lol

[Draz]

Most worthless class I've ever taken in college. They just want money dam fggts

[RidonKs]

it's fun. and a worthwhile way to spend a few years, for a number of reasons. nobody should be paid to study many of the areas that are professionally funded imo, but that's just my own value judgement.

the problem is it costs a fortune to study it seriously with a lot of people. which means in order to study it, most people have to go into huge debt. and that's not worthwhile... that's a foolish option when the alternative is studying something to actually make a living for yourself going forward.

not that it really has to be so expensive. consider the resources that actually go into it a semester of a philosophy class. it has nothing to do with how much it costs to participate in one.

if it were cheaper and it wasn't treated like just another ticket to a salary, it'd do people a lot of good.

[Akrazotile]

it's fun. and a worthwhile way to spend a few years, for a number of reasons. nobody should be paid to study many of the areas that are professionally funded imo, but that's just my own value judgement.

the problem is it costs a fortune to study it seriously with a lot of people. which means in order to study it, most people have to go into huge debt. and that's not worthwhile... that's a foolish option when the alternative is studying something to actually make a living for yourself going forward.

not that it really has to be so expensive. consider the resources that actually go into it a semester of a philosophy class. it has nothing to do with how much it costs to participate in one.

if it were cheaper and it wasn't treated like just another ticket to a salary, it'd do people a lot of good.



Yep.

Too many kids think anything that is interesting to learn about must be worth getting a degree in. I had no idea what sort of profession I wanted to work in as an adult when I went off to college, so I just signed up to major in "sociology".

One semester in I said to myself "Im actually paying money for THIS??" And I promptly dropped out. Just because some professions require a degree doesnt mean everyone needs to get one. Collegiate education has become such a sucker-scam. You can teach yourself practically ANYTHING that you just want to learn with the resources available today. Unless youre going into law, med, or a small handful of other fields, college is a waste of time and money. But hey, most people just gonna do what theyre told, do what the culture says, and if everyone else is goin to college then they are too. Thats their decision, I just dont wanna hear bout their loans getting bailed out by taxpayers, just like I didnt wanna hear about banks gettin bailed out. But hey, bailouts are the perfect way for government to leverage more control in places they want it. And the short sighted, unprincipled public eats it up and gladly makes the exchange.

[9erempiree]

God damn. Sitting in here as we speak and just a bunch of sheeps.

:facepalm

[step_back]

I love to read Alain De Botton and discuss philosophy with people but you're out of your damm mind if you spend thousands on a degree.

College has become a cash cow over the last few decades. I went to school with someone who studied a 3 year course in comedy. Either you're funny or you're not:rolleyes:

[RidonKs]

You can teach yourself practically ANYTHING that you just want to learn with the resources available today. Unless youre going into law, med, or a small handful of other fields, college is a waste of time and money.
see i don't agree with that at all

the problem is the economy of university, not the content. of course there are much better ways of organizing academia than the system we have now, and hopefully we continue to explore them... but writing off the system would be an enormous mistake.

you're right, the information is available. anybody living a modest existencein the developed world has more or less access to all the information the best physicists, engineers, artists, tradespeople, businessmen, and philosophy professors could ever want.

(though at the same time there are trends under way to privatize academic research, turning it into another commodity and limiting access to those who can afford it, which would be an enormous mistake)

the problem is that it's incredibly difficult to master a subject by yourself, even with a giant database at your personal disposal. it takes a very rare person to succeed in those circumstances. that isn't to say anybody who can't is incapable of tackling the subject altogether, only they won't do it as well as they might working together in large groups feeding off of one another's energy and collaborating. and under those circumstances it's patently obvious that the average person can make a substantial contribution that they might not otherwise. it's actually a bit absurd to expect the average person to succeed by themselves.

higher education is enormously inflated. we can argue over the factors that make that the case, i'm sure we would disagree. but so long as we agree on the fact that education doesn't have to be so expensive, which i think is obvious just on its face, there's no need to doubt collecting learning as an important enterprise altogether.

[IamRAMBO24]

dawg why would you enter in to such a useless course:facepalm

It must be full of a bunch of marxist dumbasses with neck beards.

I feel for you breh.

Useless? The f*ck is wrong with you? Out of all the courses in school, I would say philosophy is the only one that requires you to take on huge concepts. Everything else is basic memorization. The philosophy I took requires a 10 page essay that has to be seminal and thought provoking for each homework assignment. You couldn't copy and paste sh*t from the book and expect an A like 99% of your other courses.

Philosophy is only "useless" to the lower class because it's powerful. Period. They're not going to tell you this sh*t if you're broke and poor. For centuries, it's the main cause of revolutions. To truly appreciate philosophy, you're going to have to go to an ivy league school to see how they teach it.

[Nanners]

its sad how higher education has shifted from a place you go to improve your mental capabilities to a place that you go to get trained for your future job. philosophy, literature, psychology... calling these fields useless just because you cant make money with them is losing sight of the entire point of university in the first place.

the point of philosophy is to learn how to think critically, how to recognize logical fallacies, how to argue logically, etc. these things are not useless.

[knickballer]

it's fun. and a worthwhile way to spend a few years, for a number of reasons. nobody should be paid to study many of the areas that are professionally funded imo, but that's just my own value judgement.

the problem is it costs a fortune to study it seriously with a lot of people. which means in order to study it, most people have to go into huge debt. and that's not worthwhile... that's a foolish option when the alternative is studying something to actually make a living for yourself going forward.

not that it really has to be so expensive. consider the resources that actually go into it a semester of a philosophy class. it has nothing to do with how much it costs to participate in one.

if it were cheaper and it wasn't treated like just another ticket to a salary, it'd do people a lot of good.

If you're living in the US just attend a state university that's local and suddenly it becomes very affordable. Unfortunately there's million of US teens who are idiots and decide to go to $30-40k/yr institution. Do these kids not realize by the time they graduate they'll accumulate something like 100k debt since they don't have any income that can pay for it?

State schools are something like 6-10k/yr. Yes, it's a bit pricey but paying something like 4k a semester is much better than paying 20k..

[IamRAMBO24]

Most worthless class I've ever taken in college. They just want money dam fggts

It's trying to teach you how to think. It's not asking you to memorize and repeat it on a test. It really wants you to understand the subject so deeply you will come up with your own idea about the subject, well, if the philosophy teacher is doing his job that is.

To me, it is the most important subject in school. If you teach a kid how to memorize, you'll teach him for a month until he forgets about it. But if you teach him how to think, you're going to make him into an intellectual for life.

[IamRAMBO24]

its sad how higher education has shifted from a place you go to improve your mental capabilities to a place that you go to get trained for your future job. philosophy, literature, psychology... calling these fields useless just because you cant make money with them is losing sight of the entire point of university in the first place.

the point of philosophy is to learn how to think critically, how to recognize logical fallacies, how to argue logically, etc. these things are not useless.

:rockon:

Yup, philosophy will make anybody versed in logic, and with logic (or the misuse of it), you can get some of the highest paying careers in the country: lawyer, politician, writer, radio and talk show host, etc.

[Jailblazers7]

Philosophy courses that study logic are actually really valuable especially for something like computer programming or statistical programming.

[kNIOKAS]

Yep.

Too many kids think anything that is interesting to learn about must be worth getting a degree in. I had no idea what sort of profession I wanted to work in as an adult when I went off to college, so I just signed up to major in "sociology".

One semester in I said to myself "Im actually paying money for THIS??" And I promptly dropped out. Just because some professions require a degree doesnt mean everyone needs to get one. Collegiate education has become such a sucker-scam. You can teach yourself practically ANYTHING that you just want to learn with the resources available today. Unless youre going into law, med, or a small handful of other fields, college is a waste of time and money. But hey, most people just gonna do what theyre told, do what the culture says, and if everyone else is goin to college then they are too. Thats their decision, I just dont wanna hear bout their loans getting bailed out by taxpayers, just like I didnt wanna hear about banks gettin bailed out. But hey, bailouts are the perfect way for government to leverage more control in places they want it. And the short sighted, unprincipled public eats it up and gladly makes the exchange.
Remembering some of your posts it's very evident you dropped out of sociology.

[TheReal Kendall]

Most worthless class I've ever taken in college. They just want money dam fggts

Naw. Orientation class is the most worthless and they force you to take it. When I took that crap the teacher made us write freaking journals everyday and turn that shit in.

[Akrazotile]

Remembering some of your posts it's very evident you dropped out of sociology.


Oh?

Which ones?

[Godzuki]

i always thought Philosophy courses took the most brain power, or at least logical deep thought by far. a lot of people can't follow that stuff when it gets deep.

[IamRAMBO24]

Philosophy courses that study logic are actually really valuable especially for something like computer programming or statistical programming.

Logic is extremely valuable. This is why guys like Bill O Reilly and Stephen Smith can take any point (no matter how absurd) and make it sound legit by abusing it, and it is really hard to argue against them if you're not versed in it.

[Lamar Doom]

its sad how higher education has shifted from a place you go to improve your mental capabilities to a place that you go to get trained for your future job. philosophy, literature, psychology... calling these fields useless just because you cant make money with them is losing sight of the entire point of university in the first place.

the point of philosophy is to learn how to think critically, how to recognize logical fallacies, how to argue logically, etc. these things are not useless.


This motherf*cker always talking sense. One of the very few beacons of reason on this shit hole message board.

[IamRAMBO24]

i always thought Philosophy courses took the most brain power, or at least logical deep thought by far. a lot of people can't follow that stuff when it gets deep.

In this day and age kids are discouraged from creativity and thinking; this is why art and philosophy are "useless" subjects that they view won't get them very far in life when it's really the opposite. If you're a great creative thinker, you can do much more with your career than merely slaving away doing some tedious task that requires very little thinking.

Philosophy is a way of life; you can't just take a course in college and call yourself a philosopher. You have to live and breathe learning; philosophy wants to gain wisdom as opposed to education which only aims for knowledge. You go to college for 4 years and you're done; with philosophy, you can study it for the rest of your life and still can't be consider a man of wisdom, heck, I've been studying it for 13 years and I still don't know much about it.

[Akrazotile]

its sad how higher education has shifted from a place you go to improve your mental capabilities to a place that you go to get trained for your future job. philosophy, literature, psychology... calling these fields useless just because you cant make money with them is losing sight of the entire point of university in the first place.

the point of philosophy is to learn how to think critically, how to recognize logical fallacies, how to argue logically, etc. these things are not useless.


Not a single person in here called the field useless.

A few people noted its piteous lack of value as a college course that you have to pay money to take and then be "graded" by some bozo who may or may not have the slightest clue what he's talking about.


Apparently the difference between the two perspectives is too subtle for ye.

[Bandito]

Most worthless class I've ever taken in college. They just want money dam fggts
I agree with you as usual.

[IamRAMBO24]

Not a single person in here called the field useless.

A few people noted its piteous lack of value as a college course that you have to pay money to take and then be "graded" by some bozo who may or may not have the slightest clue what he's talking about.


Apparently the difference between the two perspectives is too subtle for ye.

How did you get, "Most worthless class I've ever taken in college," to "a piteous lack of value .. then graded by some bozo with the slightest clue" ..... ?

When he used the phrase "worthless" he is implying "having no real value or use." He didn't say the class was pitiful. He said it was worthless. He finds absolutely no value you in it even though the credits can be used towards his degree as an extra curriculum, meaning he prob did not learn anything from it and most likely failed the course and did not get the credit he needed, hence the use of the term "worthless."

[RidonKs]

have any of you heard of allan watts? i stumbled into him watching a few cartoons on youtube that were supposedly made by the south park guys. here's a collection of them (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YgEhvZDZVg) -- there's one in there that sort of addresses what nanners was talking about, basically what education has become nowadays.

this is the philosophical content i prefer. he calls himself a "spiritual entertainer", and you could just as well say philosophical entertainer. i think that goes right to the point. at the end of the day, it belongs more to the category of art than to the category of science. the real world implications of the discipline are really that remote. but it's fun. and it feels important. and best of all it provides a healthy roadmap for personal reflection, which is i think what the op is confusing with taking a philosophy class (there's a bit of overlap).

this is why philosophical content in novels and movies and public lecturing like watts, content that people will actually enjoy, are far more productive than whatever the hell oxford and harvard intellectuals are churning out in professional journals. i don't think that shit is of much use to anyone to be perfectly honest, whereas philosophy in entertainment can have a profound influence on the culture.

rambo and nanners have the right idea when it comes to the benefits of studying philosophy in school... but it's not like a lifetime of study is going to give you much more insight into anything that matters than a few intense years. a lifetime of excessive inquiry and you're far more likely to fall into one of the many trappings; rehashing arguments that have already been settled, reinterpreting the work of the giants, making grand ontological claims, the whole post structural / critical theory mumbo jumbo world of trying to deduce abstractions by divorcing events from their context. that's all total nonsense and a real waste of time that could be spent interacting with the real world. but these are ways professional philosophers make themselves and each other feel important and it's no worse than a careerist musician. it's a form of therapy and it's nice to be able to do it for a living.

of course there are parts of philosophy departments around the world doing serious work in areas that matter. most of comes out of new scientific understanding that requires some philosophical clarification. so theoretical physics has to employ aspects of philosophy. neurophilosophy is another one. and there is a lot of insight to be gained from well designed psychological experiments with significant philosophical underpinnings.

there's actually a new book that takes this stance quite strongly called Empty Ideas by a guy named Peter Unger. he's a former professional philosopher who finally found himself fed up. here's an interview he did if want a gist, worth reading imo (http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2014/06/philosophy-is-a-bunch-of-empty-ideas-interview-with-peter-unger.html).

he references a cocitation network that was published a few months ago... it basically puts all the citations of the five major international journals of philosophy into an algorithm to see which works and which authors are getting the most play. the two big studs are saul kripke and david lewis. find their most heralded work on wikipedia and give it a read. what the hell are we supposed to get out of this stuff again?

[IamRAMBO24]

have any of you heard of allan watts?

Hell yea.

Stuff like this is why I love philosophy:

Alan Watts Inception (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xCFoJ0aywc)

It just opens new avenues of thought. You can't call it "knowledge." It's not just given to you. It opens your mind and spurs your creativity leading to new thoughts, and newer ones, and newer ones, so on and so forth. It is endless. Learning should never be given to you. You should find it on your own.

[Akrazotile]

How did you get, "Most worthless class I've ever taken in college," to "a piteous lack of value .. then graded by some bozo with the slightest clue" ..... ?

When he used the phrase "worthless" he is implying "having no real value or use." He didn't say the class was pitiful. He said it was worthless. He finds absolutely no value you in it even though the credits can be used towards his degree as an extra curriculum, meaning he prob did not learn anything from it and most likely failed the course and did not get the credit he needed, hence the use of the term "worthless."


:biggums:


"Worthless" and a "piteous lack of value" are the exact same things brotherman.

[RidonKs]

Hell yea.

Stuff like this is why I love philosophy:

Alan Watts Inception (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xCFoJ0aywc)

It just opens new avenues of thought. You can't call it "knowledge." It's not just given to you. It opens your mind and spurs your creativity leading to new thoughts, and newer ones, and newer ones, so on and so forth. It is endless. Learning should never be given to you. You should find it on your own.
that's just beautiful with that music. and really inspiring. the idea that we're master of our domain and our best possible future is what we make ahead of us is the sort of thought that i use to shake myself out of bouts of anxiety and stress when i get too caught up in the moment. it's like a huge burden gets lifted off your shoulders.

[Jailblazers7]

that's just beautiful with that music. and really inspiring. the idea that we're master of our domain and our best possible future is what we make ahead of us is the sort of thought that i use to shake myself out of bouts of anxiety and stress when i get too caught up in the moment. it's like a huge burden gets lifted off your shoulders.

That quote "a perfectly known future is the past" is a really fantastic qupte. Oddly enough it made me think of an episode of Louie where he says that his favorite part about dating is the gut wrenching uncertainty right before you ask someone out. It is important to remind yourself sometimes that we really do live for those moments of uncertainty and the intensity of emotion that they inspire.

There is a twitter account that I follow call @****theory who is a philosophy professor that rails against most academic philosophy. He goes on a lot of rants about sexual difference and stuff but he talks about the difference between duration and intensity in our experience of time that is fascinating.

[STATUTORY]

wittgenstein and nietzsche basically ended academic study of philosophy, people basically posturing and regurgitating stuff now

[oarabbus]

:biggums:


"Worthless" and a "piteous lack of value" are the exact same things brotherman.

:lol

[RidonKs]

That quote "a perfectly known future is the past" is a really fantastic qupte.
yep

determinism is boring. whether you're implying it from ancient scripture or a political or technological imperative or whatever, it takes the fun out of everything. freedom in chaos is an exhilarating experience. and it's a fact of life so you might as well enjoy the ride.


There is a twitter account that I follow call @****theory who is a philosophy professor that rails against most academic philosophy. He goes on a lot of rants about sexual difference and stuff but he talks about the difference between duration and intensity in our experience of time that is fascinating.

ha i like this guy

[Bless Mathews]

This course and subject matter is crap. You cannot teach people philosophy. It taught by one's self. 7 page papers for nothing and in class discussions lead to nothing but talking in circles.

Such an easy course for an intellect like myself.

:facepalm
Lolololol

For such a 21 year old college student, you are an idiot.

[ace23]

Such an easy course for an intellect like myself.

(-x or -s) implies (p and a)
p implies e
-e is true.

Prove that x is true.

[GimmeThat]

a bad philosophy professor can really screw up your mind.

[ace23]

Where you at, intellectual?

Doesn't even have to be a formal proof. Just explain why x is true.

[9erempiree]

(-x or -s) implies (p and a)
p implies e
-e is true.

Prove that x is true.


Antecedent is conflicting with consequent.

It is neither Modus Ponens -or- Modus Tollens.

Most likely invalid.

[ace23]

Antecedent is conflicting with consequent.

It is neither Modus Ponens -or- Modus Tollens.

Most likely invalid.
:roll:

Stay in school.

[9erempiree]

:roll:

Stay in school.
:facepalm

[STATUTORY]

(-x or -s) implies (p and a)
p implies e
-e is true.

Prove that x is true.

really ni99a? you wasted time taking a deductive logic course in a philosophy department?

spend a semester learning stuff ppl in computer science learn in the first week of math for compsci? truth tables be that hard?

e is false -> p is false -> (-x or -s) is false -> x is true

[ace23]

really ni99a? you wasted time taking a deductive logic course in a philosophy department?

spend a semester learning stuff ppl in computer science learn in the first week of math for compsci? truth tables be that hard?

e is false -> p is false -> (-x or -s) is false -> x is true
I'm a CS major.

[9erempiree]

I'm a CS major.

Nothing to do with philosophy.:facepalm

If I was to ask you to construct that equation into a different form, I bet you can't do it.

Such as:

If John is a woman and Sara is a man.....

[9erempiree]

really ni99a? you wasted time taking a deductive logic course in a philosophy department?

spend a semester learning stuff ppl in computer science learn in the first week of math for compsci? truth tables be that hard?

e is false -> p is false -> (-x or -s) is false -> x is true

Deducutive, Valid eh?

Modus Ponens?

[riseagainst]

i agree. Typing papers for philosophy is not philosophy. Socratic discussions constant questioning and thinking is what philosophy is really about, at least in terms of a class.

[9erempiree]

i agree. Typing papers for philosophy is not philosophy. Socratic discussions constant questioning and thinking is what philosophy is really about, at least in terms of a class.

Exactly what my complaint is.

[ace23]

Nothing to do with philosophy.:facepalm

If I was to ask you to construct that equation into a different form, I bet you can't do it.

Such as:

If John is a woman and Sara is a man.....
Lol.

That notation is used in any kind of logic class, not only discrete mathematics. And it's easy to put into word form.

STATUTORY didn't prove shit btw, but I trust that he knows what he's talking about. You on the other hand...

[DonD13]

are philosophy courses crap?

is philosophy the only thing worth teaching?

Ivy league member Rambo and alpha intellectual 9er and Nick Young together with friends in one thread make up for a tremendous discussion.

i invite you to print it using ISH very own print function: http://insidehoops.com/forum/printthread.php?t=345710

[inclinerator]

arent u a little old for philosophy class

[RidonKs]

STATUTORY didn't prove shit btw, but I trust that he knows what he's talking about. You on the other hand...
how come? i worked it out last night and came to the same thing just in a different format. how would you prove it?

[9erempiree]

how come? i worked it out last night and came to the same thing just in a different format. how would you prove it?

He can't.

I am also waiting for him to construct it in real world argument.

[Bless Mathews]

arent u a little old for philosophy class
He's 20.

[ace23]

how come? i worked it out last night and came to the same thing just in a different format. how would you prove it?
He didn't actually prove it. He just drew arrows.

Given the three conditions,

-p is true by mod. tollens
-p implies (-p or -a) by addition
(-p or -a) implies -(p and a) by demorgan
-(-x or -s) is true by mod tollens
(x and s) is true by demorgan
so x is true by simplification

You could also use a truth table, but that'd take a long ass time.

[9erempiree]

He didn't actually prove it. He just drew arrows.

Given the three conditions,

-p is true by mod. tollens
-p implies (-p or -a) by addition
(-p or -a) implies -(p and a) by demorgan
-(-x or -s) is true by mod tollens
(x and s) is true by demorgan
so x is true by simplification

You could also use a truth table, but that'd take a long ass time.

:facepalm

fake ass philosopher. We call you guys the equation philosophers.

Trying learning it the in real world arguments.

[STATUTORY]

He didn't actually prove it. He just drew arrows.

Given the three conditions,

-p is true by mod. tollens
-p implies (-p or -a) by addition
(-p or -a) implies -(p and a) by demorgan
-(-x or -s) is true by mod tollens
(x and s) is true by demorgan, so x is true

You could also use a truth table, but that'd take a long ass time.
:lol bro i do math, we don't use these pointless nomenclature, i guess i could have used set theory

but that's like me saying you didn't prove anything because all you did was write down references to established results :lol

a proof is suppose to be something understandable by people with no prior expertise in teh subject, wtf is mod. tollens suppose to mean to people?

lower the pretension bro

[ace23]

I am also waiting for him to construct it in real world argument.
If 9er is not a ****** or if ace23 hasn't ****ed 9er's mom, then 9er is a philosophical genius and has a father figure. If he has a father figure, he will stop arguing with me. He will not stop arguing with me.

Prove that 9er is a ******

[ace23]

:lol bro i do math, we don't use these pointless nomenclature, i guess i could have used set theory

but that's like me saying you didn't prove anything because all you did was write down references to established results :lol

a proof is suppose to be something understandable by people with no prior expertise in teh subject, wtf is mod. tollens suppose to mean to people?

lower the pretension bro
Ight. Idk why I'm doing this.

[masonanddixon]

Have you read 'The Philosophical Investigations', man?

[RidonKs]

He didn't actually prove it. He just drew arrows.

Given the three conditions,

-p is true by mod. tollens
-p implies (-p or -a) by addition
(-p or -a) implies -(p and a) by demorgan
-(-x or -s) is true by mod tollens
(x and s) is true by demorgan
so x is true by simplification

You could also use a truth table, but that'd take a long ass time.
i've never heard of any of that stuff

you learn the same basic techniques to complete the lsat. the formulas you used above anyway. why bother with the weird terminology?

[ace23]

i've never heard of any of that stuff

you learn the same basic techniques to complete the lsat. the formulas you used above anyway. why bother with the weird terminology?
Because that's how you prove something. You justify steps using established facts, not just draw arrows.

Dude said "e is false -> p is false -> (-x or -s) is false -> x is true"

You might as well just say -e -> x.

It's whatever tho.

[RidonKs]

you guys used the exact same steps. he just skipped a few you listed because they're easy enough to assume.

[ace23]

you guys used the exact same steps. he just skipped a few you listed because they're easy enough to assume.
I'm aware of that. He also didn't justify any of them.

From what I saw, I can tell he knows what he's talking about. It's just not a proof, hence "didn't prove shit".

:lol

Like I said, he might as well have said -e -> x.

[shlver]

i've never heard of any of that stuff

you learn the same basic techniques to complete the lsat. the formulas you used above anyway. why bother with the weird terminology?
That's how you prove formally and correctly. A logical proof requires established methods of reasoning to determine the consequences of your assumptions.

[Jailblazers7]

I remember see all of those terms in my propositional logic class. It's just the formal terms for valid argument forms that you'd see in an academic setting.

[Bless Mathews]

Yet all these people arguing about complex philosophical shit type they "talk" and "said" on a message board.

Can't trust a thing nunya niggahs type.

[RidonKs]

I'm aware of that. He also didn't justify any of them.

From what I saw, I can tell he knows what he's talking about. It's just not a proof, hence "didn't prove shit".

:lol

Like I said, he might as well have said -e -> x.

That's how you prove formally and correctly. A logical proof requires established methods of reasoning to determine the consequences of your assumptions.
i gotchas. that problem didn't need it but more complexity makes it necessary.

[Cowboy Thunder]

this thread is full of red herrings & straw men. meh.

[IamRAMBO24]

this thread is full of red herrings & straw men. meh.

At least they are aware of logic. This is why the OTC has some of the best posters on this site.

[shlver]

i gotchas. that problem didn't need it but more complexity makes it necessary.
Not really complexity, more for clarity's sake.