Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old 12-04-2009, 07:51 AM
ImaginaryIllusion's Avatar
ImaginaryIllusion ImaginaryIllusion is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,944
Lightbulb Fallacy of Logic, Pt1 (Revisited)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
When Seventh Crow said the book is too new-agey and Mono said he didn't think it was, he was, in fact, talking about the new-ageyness of a book without ever using the word "new-agey" personally.
Joreth.

This is precisely what I mean about checking your assumptions. You have made your point of view well known in over 3 dozen posts on this topic. Go back and reread my post. If you still don't understand, read it again...and again...until you do. I don't have another 8 hours to explain it all over again, and I'd have to get out an easel and my logic textbooks which don't post on here so easily.

Pay attention to the very beginning of my first part, and all of the second part. It shows a reasonable set of assumptions which would lead someone to come to the very same conclusion which you have been kind enough to repeat here. The last part shows exactly where those assumptions can be disproven, and thus are logically false.
Your quote above also indicates to me that you have not actually read the words...only your interpretation...and I'm curious if you are actually able to separate the two. Mono never said he didn't agree with SC about anything. Only that he knew some poly people who agreed with SC.


I want to make something very clear. I understand both your interpretation of the text and the how you arrived there. That does not mean the interpretation is correct. I'll refer to it now as Interpretation J in the following proof:

Unstated Assumption A: All three sentences form single statement.
Unstated Assumption B: When speaking of a mono mind, the poster means all mono’s
Proposition C: SC said this book is New Agey
Proposition D: Mono's text

If A and B and C and D, then E:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
When Seventh Crow said the book is too new-agey and Mono said he didn't think it was, he was, in fact, talking about the new-ageyness of a book without ever using the word "new-agey" personally.
If E and B then J: (aka Interpretation J)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
Mono claimed that it was his monogamous nature (biological or learned is irrelevant) that made him agree with a book's new-ageyness.
Proposition F:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
Ceoli and I were both pointing out that what makes a person poly or mono is not what makes Mono as an individual agree with or not agree with "new age" spirituality.
If J and F then H:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
The statement is incorrect factually and it is a logical fallacy called a non-sequitor. The statement is wrong no matter who says it.
(...same applies to how many times a statement is said.)


So...to review, you're logic is internally valid.
A+B+C+D -> E
E+B -> J
F
J+F -> H



So, Back to my previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ImaginaryIllusion View Post
Let’s back track to the first interpretation, and the first basic assumptions:

Assumption 1: All three sentences form single statement.
Read the text, and particularly the last part of his revised explanation (from post 67 by the way) assumption 1 is false.

Assumption 2: When speaking of a mono mind, the poster means all mono’s
Again, from his revised clarification, assumption 2 is false.
Where assumption 1 & 2 are the same as A & B, they are both false as should have been evidenced elsewhere in that post.

C is True...SC said what he said.
D is True...mono said what he said. (and it a moment it won't matter how he worded it)

A+B+C+D -> E
False + False + True + True -> False
E = False


I'm going to focus for a moment on a specific portion of E:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
When Seventh Crow said the book is too new-agey and Mono said he didn't think it was.
Nowhere in D did Mono offer *his* opinion of the book. He only said what he had heard from other poly people that he knew. E does not follow...and is therefore also non
Therefore...E is False...twice

E+B -> J
False + False -> False
J = False

F is True.
I'll spend a moment here, and this specific part I will also address to Ceoli. F as I see it, is basically a generally accepted truth that the attributes of a group does not determine the attributes of an individual. This is Fallacy of distribution.
Overcoming this fallacy is a key driver in the progress we have made over the last few generations to oppose racism, sexism, or most of the other -isms. I doubt there would be many, if any (...maybe the Russian Spammer), people on this board who would disagree with this. I also expect that the passion in which this has been pursued would probably be commended or admired by many here, including some of those on the other side of this particular discussion. I'm hoping a more generic and impersonal discussion about F will bare this out, such as this one...I have high hopes.
F = True

J+F -> H
False + True -> False
H = False

If and only if...A and B had been true, and E actually followed from D at all, then you could have proven H.

However, due to False premise, the following applies to E, J, and H:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
This is a factually incorrect and logically fallacious statement. Period.


Now, I know there was never any personal malice in your words.
I understand there has been a lot of confusion about your bluntness and personal attacks. And I know you never intended to make a personal attack on Mono, regardless of what may have been perceived. So I expect you'll understand the following:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
Not an attack:
Your statement was incorrect.
Joreth...your statements were incorrect.

The bulk of your 40 posts attempting to prove by assertion on this thread has frankly bludgeoned the living tar out of the subject, were based on and contained incorrect statements, (and now cost me no less than 11 hours that I could have been sleeping...and I haven't even got to Pt2 yet) in addition to bogging the thread down in argumentum ad nauseam.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Joreth View Post
LOL I now have this image in my head of Spock standing there saying "that's highly illogical" and someone jumping up and down, red-faced and sputtering, calling him a loose cannon.
If Spock had reached H as you did, and saw this...he'd be green faced.

The upshot of Vulcan's...they'd at least admit it…and might even go find a more productive, and abstract discussion to have that didn’t involve emotional human names.
__________________
“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.” - Chinese Proverb

-Imaginary Illusion

How did I get here & Where am I going?
Reply With Quote
 

Tags
mono/poly, monogamous

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:59 AM.