Logical Fallacies

[parson]

i've never finished any of RAW's books but i do like reading about his ideas and listening to him talk.

here's some good audio of him here:
http://www.futurehi.net/media.html

[hurlingdervish]

Oh dear...

If you base your life around the idea of the Burden of Proof you are well and truly fucked.

That is all....

who said anything about basing life around it?

its simply a way to argue properly without throwing punches

[parson]

debating is pointless and only reinforces a presupposed paradigm
http://www.dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.p ... ity+debate

[hurlingdervish]

debating is pointless and only reinforces a presupposed paradigm
http://www.dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.p ... ity+debate

then why do you engage in them so often?

i mean really.. if you didnt want to debate why are you getting so defensive

[parson]

why don't you try harder to pay attention and learn

[hurlingdervish]

why don't you try harder to pay attention and learn

learn from what?


from the thread?

parson, you know i love ya, so take this as it is meant.

you talk about the presuppositions imposed on debate, and you are a great example of just that, and the part about debate that i don't like. you say that debate is useless, then when people challenge you on that notion, you don't seem to want to actually listen to what people have to say, but continue to repeat your hard and fast idea, without seemingly making any attempt to hear the other points, or concede even an iota. it sets you up to seem arrogant and condescending, even if that is not your intent.

i was basically going to say the same thing until i read this.

you seem like you are smart but at the same time you are unaware of the contradictions you are putting out.

nice tunes btw

[parson]

hollaa

[selrahc]

well logic does have flaws because if you are looking to buy a car you can choose between the cheaper used car, and the more expensive but reliable new car, logic wont tell you what to choose.

not true - depending on your circumstances (how much money you've got, how important status is to you, how much you're going to drive the car etc), it is possible to make a logical choice of which car is better for you.

a computer can do logic, but it can't make choices which is in part what logic helps us do but ultimately relies on other things

again, not true. we don't necessarily use computers to make decisions or choices, but they can, given a set of conditions, and using pure logic, as they're constructed using fundamental logic gating (i.e. "if A then B"). an example where you do use it is drug design - you give computers a set of parameters and it decides what the most likely design of a successful drug is.

[parson]

i'd pay good money to see charles use logic to get a woman into bed

[fuagofire]

well logic does have flaws because if you are looking to buy a car you can choose between the cheaper used car, and the more expensive but reliable new car, logic wont tell you what to choose.

not true - depending on your circumstances (how much money you've got, how important status is to you, how much you're going to drive the car etc), it is possible to make a logical choice of which car is better for you.

nah the logical choice for a car would be a second hand rover 100 for about £500 quid and when it breaks leave it by the side of the road and get another one - you need emotion to make decisions.
there have been cases where people have had brain damage and lost emotion allmost completely and cant decide what to eat where to go - ill try and find a link for it but it may take a while.

[selrahc]

i'd pay good money to see charles use logic to get a woman into bed

cutting

thankfully i've got chat for days (and not just about bosnian pyramids and computers).

there have been cases where people have had brain damage and lost emotion allmost completely and cant decide what to eat where to go - ill try and find a link for it but it may take a while.

if you've lost emotions then you've lost a pretty large portion of your drive to make decisions - you can't make a logical decision if you've got no desire to experience any of the outcomes.

[parson]

bosnian pyramids get me laid every time

[hurlingdervish]

well logic does have flaws because if you are looking to buy a car you can choose between the cheaper used car, and the more expensive but reliable new car, logic wont tell you what to choose.

not true - depending on your circumstances (how much money you've got, how important status is to you, how much you're going to drive the car etc), it is possible to make a logical choice of which car is better for you.

a computer can do logic, but it can't make choices which is in part what logic helps us do but ultimately relies on other things

again, not true. we don't necessarily use computers to make decisions or choices, but they can, given a set of conditions, and using pure logic, as they're constructed using fundamental logic gating (i.e. "if A then B"). an example where you do use it is drug design - you give computers a set of parameters and it decides what the most likely design of a successful drug
is.

true that it would be logical to you based on your experience, but a decision based on experience is surely not one of logic, but the combined effort?

machines operate through logic, we know this. but what they lack is the element of experience and emotion.

consider this...(with a grain of salt)

this "robot" is in a hostage situation with four gunmen and two hostages and has to choose (hypothetically) between
a. the girl lives, the guy dies
b. the guy lives, the girl dies
c. bust in there and subdue the gunmen with a chance of both being shot

how would the logical robot know which would to choose if only operating on logic?

a girl and a guy are both humans to it, yet wouldn't a human pick the women to come out first? if so, to program that into the robot would be unethical would it not?

[parson]

if you've lost emotions then you've lost a pretty large portion of your drive to make decisions - you can't make a logical decision if you've got no desire to experience any of the outcomes.

desire to experience the outcome can be based strictly on maximization or optimization or any other such arbitrary distiinction and doesn't have to have anything to do with an emotional attachment to the desired outcome.

[selrahc]

bosnian pyramids get me laid every time

"excuse me, have you heard about my 200 metre bosnian pyramid?"

and i'll concede that you've got a point about emotional attachment not being linked to desire to experience things.

a girl and a guy are both humans to it, yet wouldn't a human pick the women to come out first? if so, to program that into the robot would be unethical would it not?

why would a human necessarily pick the woman? a man might, but a woman might not, and the man's kid/wife probably wouldn't. what if the woman was a convicted murderer, but the man was a charity worker? or if the woman was 93 and terminally ill? etc. it's never as simple as that example, which is why logic might be helpful if you're faced with what looks like an impossible choice.

obviously in situations where you don't have any sort of background info there might not always be a logical answer. my girlfriend got asked in her uni interview what she would do if 3 convicted bank robbers were tied to a set of rail tracks, and a kid to another set. a train is going to run either the kid or the convicts over, killing them. you have to decide which set of tracks to send the train down. i don't know if there's a right answer (i doubt it), but all they were looking for was a logical reason for the choice. in a way, people might justify things that they find morally troubling by making what seems to be a logical choice.

[hurlingdervish]

why would a human necessarily pick the woman? a man might, but a woman might not, and the man's kid/wife probably wouldn't. what if the woman was a convicted murderer, but the man was a charity worker? or if the woman was 93 and terminally ill? etc. it's never as simple as that example, which is why logic might be helpful if you're faced with what looks like an impossible choice.

because "women and children first" is ingrained into most of us. you've proved my point by disagreeing though, it really is never as simple as "if A then B" but it still is necessary to have those faculties

obviously in situations where you don't have any sort of background info there might not always be a logical answer. my girlfriend got asked in her uni interview what she would do if 3 convicted bank robbers were tied to a set of rail tracks, and a kid to another set. a train is going to run either the kid or the convicts over, killing them. you have to decide which set of tracks to send the train down. i don't know if there's a right answer (i doubt it), but all they were looking for was a logical reason for the choice. in a way, people might justify things that they find morally troubling by making what seems to be a logical choice.

obviously you bribe the robbers into giving you a cut if you let them go

thats not a hard decision though, the moral decision is to let the kid go, however if you have a penny you could derail the train and save them all at the sacrifice of the conductor and 200,000 pounds of coal

[parson]

we KNOW what the government has told us is physically impossible

do we?

what do you know, beyond whats on the internet at the moment? this is the thing i find totally incredible about the 9/11 cultists. their whole sphere is what they've seen/read/heard on the media or on the net.

i was 30 blocks away from the towers when they fell that day. i heard no explosions. one of my best friends was in the deutche bank building, literally 1 block from the towers. they heard no explosions when the buildings came down. hundreds of people that were in and around the tower when it fell heard no explosions. yet people are willing to go on and on about engineering impossiblities based on some youtube videos and things on sites.

its horseshit. that tower came down on its own.

can anybody count the number of logical fallacies being demonstrated here?