C1 appears to follow from p1 and p2.
Printable View
Yes p3 is extraneous.
An axiom in classical logic.
If a = b and b = c then a = c.
A rock weighs 100kg. A log has the same weight as the rock. A boat weighs the same as the log. Therefore the boat weighs 100kg.
Logically why is this valid? What is the proof of the axiom?
Is it possible to be hypercritically hypothetical?
Oh. I remember.
Dough-ah
hypothetically for argument's sake.
Badge 714
Dumb da dumb dumb, dumb da dumb, dumb da dumb de dumb ....
Joe
I want to list, what I think, all possibilities.
There are assumptions, and there are conclusions that are obtained by logic.
The assumptions can be right, wrong, and incorrect. The logic can be correct and incorrect. Let me explain.
Correct logic is if the conclusions follow from assumptions. Otherwise the it is incorrect.
The assumptions can be self-consistent, claim to reflect reality (physical) world, but actually do not. This is the flat earth assumption (if it also claims that it is what actually is). Then this is wrong.
The right assumption is self consistent, and if it claims that it reflects reality, then it actually does.
The incorrect assumption is the one that is not self-consistent. "Suppose you have a sword, that can break any shield, and a shield that can stop any sword".
So, which of those is dumb logic? I argue it is the incorrect logic. The flat earth example does not belong to it - it is wrong assumption, correct logic.