A long time indeed!

You? In a 'holy war'...



Good to see you survived, bruddah!

logic rules out the illogical...
so when i say 'logicaly speaking", or "hes logical" or even "use logic and reason" im saying "use logic, logicaly to rule out the illogical?
i understand how one might say logic is used to find invalids, or to disprove something, but thats only one part of it.

IE 1 + 1 = 2, logicaly, one plus one is two.
1 + 1 = 3 according to logic, this is invalid

so we use logic to prove the first example (premises are true and inference is valid)
we also used logic to disprove the second.

logic is math. it all comes down to the numbers. it can be used to disprove, or to prove. its purly deductive.

i agree ideas should be challenged. but theres a way to do it. if person A attacks person B , person A better have a valid argument.
ad least if he or she wants to be taken seriously.

the best logic to use on bullies is the Louisville Slugger

barely ...first they nailed me to a cross then stuck a spear in me and then very rudely toss me into a tomb...it took me three days to crawl through a secret passageway

jasonpfaff...logically that's all that is required

jasonpfaff....and who will be the judge or jury that has been granted absolute power to deem that someone has a vaild argument ...no matter how you question anyone's belief it will be viewed as being an attack because in reality it is an attack ...but all one has to do is attack the issue and not the person personally

Try ta hit me! I'm the one in the

Nice work funchie! I like this. In the meantime, don't forget to do your scrunches, funches. On the other hand, some peeps are so sensitive, they will perceive any disagreement as a chance to show their muscle. The real soft spot is in giving the love to the loveless. Peace to the peaceless. Grease to the greaseless. Just saying. You won't find me at a shotgun weddin'. Though it sounds like great fun. I'll bring the cake.

Yes, that's right Mr. Wolf. I want to argue with your jaw. Just to see if it really bears a 2000 lb force on my cranium. nature rocks, man

Fece to the feceless.

Meat to the meetless.

Feat to the feetless.

Beet to the Beatles.

Edit:

Meese to the measels.

Arythmetic is a combination of axioms and conventions. It has nothing to do with logic.

Sorry.

1 + 1 = 3 is not illogical, it is against observation. Once someone puts a dot beside another dot in a place where there are no other dots, and he will see three dots, truly, then the observation of math will be rendered invalid. Not the logic.

"mygenerationbaby"...a shot gun wedding generally takes place when one of the two or perhaps three of those involve was caught after placing themselves into a compromising position and that compromising position is describes as coming into a forum and posting

to come into the forum and not attempt to discuss an issue beyond the bounderies that it has normally been discussed turns the issue into a religious belief and that may explain why some may be sensitive or get offended when what they post is challenged

no matter what you post there will be someone that doesn't agree or become offended so the only possible way someone can post without constantly worrying about stepping on someone's toes is not to post at all

all one can do is abide by the forums rules ...to then expect more from the person becomes unreasonable

mabey your right but we still used logic to find 1 + 1 = 2
we used logic to find a truth

fucnches were leaning to science vs philosophy here. my point is its valid or its not. its logical or its not. but just because its not logical doesnt make it untrue.... just not proven or observed.

It seems like you forgot a few that could benefit the OP:

mind to the mindless.

brain to the brainless.

reason to the unreasonable.

jasonpfaff...all I said was that "logic rules out the illogical" ...it not mandatory to use logic to prove that something is untrue, but logic can be use to display that the proof or the rationality doesn't exist to claim that the something is true

Sorry, pfaff... this I reject.

If something is illogical, then it is ab ovo impossible to be.

You cannot be both Pfaff and not Pfaff at the same time and at the same respect.

If A is greater than B, and B is greater than C, then A cannot be smaller than C.

And such like.

Saying that illogical things can exist and be true, is something that I can't accept.

Now, if you say that some things that are not intuitive can be true at the same time, yes, that I can accept.

But to oppose logic means to be impossible.

Do you remember how you used to do that? I mean, the process, the entire thing from beginning to end? And who were "we" in your sentence? What group of people were you doing this with? Who were the people who, with you, used logic to find 1 + 1 = 2? And what exactly was the logic sequence you used?

I am not trying to argue with you, but I'm highly suspicious of the claim you make here. That's why I ask you to say anything that you remember of this process. It'd be very interesting if you could substantiate your claim here.

noproblem wux i dont take offence. your arguments make sence and i think ill end up learning something, so it falls under "progresive discusion" as i mentioned earlier.


saying something exists and doesnt at the same time sounds alot like quantum to me.

there are plenty of illogical things that exist and are true wux.
as far as existence look at the majority of the people you meet. people are not logical creatures, they are passonate and emotional. (im making a generalization sure, but think about it, what lawyer wins? the logical one, or the persuasive one? its a sad but true fact.)
as far as it being true, heres what i ment. just becuse its not true, doesnt make it false. that pretty self explanitory i believe. science for example. or better yet, think 300 ad, could thay have even imagined some of the technology we have today? we didnt have space stations and cell phones back than. in that context, a practicle machine that could be used to take us into space was illogical. well...look how that turned out.

defining things as only true or false leaves little room for creativity, inductive thought or reasoning. and just like anything deductive, it can be good, but realize your trapping yourself in your conclusion. the parameters you set for yourself wux are not flexible. there strong sure, but theyl brake eventuly.

moving on. forgive me for saying we and not specifying. we as in any one who knows basic math.
1+1=2
the absolute value of one
plus the absolute value of one
equals two

how does that play into logic? the inference is valid ( x + x = x )
the premises are true (if you have one thing, and you add one more thing, you will have two things)
there for the equation is correct (valid and true)

i used logic to find the answer to a math problem, there for logic can be used to prove as well as disprove.

substantiated?


"But to oppose logic means to be impossible."
ever heard of invention?

it has every thing to do with logic wux.
give me a math problem in which you dont use a logical formula, system or sequence to either prove or disprove. if you can, you will be the first.
and what are you sorry for wux?

jasonpfaff...all I said was that "logic rules out the illogical" ...it not mandatory to use logic to prove that something is untrue, but logic can be use to display that the proof or the rationality doesn't exist to claim that the something is true


sure, it can also be used the other way.
so.. i agree with you in that case.
you have a very refreshing view of things.