## View Poll Results: Does (P and Q) follow from P1,...,Pn,Q1,...Qm?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
• Yes, (P and Q) logically follow from P1,...,Pn,Q1,...,Qm.

2 66.67%
• No, it is not the case that (P and Q) logically follow from P1,...,Pn,Q1,...,Qm

1 33.33%

0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll.

# Thread: Yet another logic question.

1. Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question?
It is a question because I am asking "...if we have premises P1,...,Pn, Q1,...,Qm, does (P and Q) follow as a conclusion? ". That is a question.

2. Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question?
It is a question because I am asking "...if we have premises P1,...,Pn, Q1,...,Qm, does (P and Q) follow as a conclusion? ". That is a question.
It’s a question for sure, and the argument is valid.

It follows just as surely as the following argument is valid:
P1. P
P2. Q
Therefore, C. (P and Q)

The only difference is that your example is more like:

P1: C1
P2: C2
Therefore, C3. (C1 and C2)

3. Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question? Conjunction or AND is a definition. If a is true and b is true than a & b is true. The sequences of premises are irrelevant.
That's not what the question asks. You want to comment on logic and you can't even read the first post of the thread properly.
EB

4. Originally Posted by fast
Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question?
It is a question because I am asking "...if we have premises P1,...,Pn, Q1,...,Qm, does (P and Q) follow as a conclusion? ". That is a question.
It’s a question for sure, and the argument is valid.

It follows just as surely as the following argument is valid:
P1. P
P2. Q
Therefore, C. (P and Q)

The only difference is that your example is more like:

P1: C1
P2: C2
Therefore, C3. (C1 and C2)
That's not what the question asks.
EB

5. Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Originally Posted by fast

It’s a question for sure, and the argument is valid.

It follows just as surely as the following argument is valid:
P1. P
P2. Q
Therefore, C. (P and Q)

The only difference is that your example is more like:

P1: C1
P2: C2
Therefore, C3. (C1 and C2)
That's not what the question asks.
EB
While fast added other points, he did say that it follows, and voted accordingly.

6. Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question?
It is a question because I am asking "...if we have premises P1,...,Pn, Q1,...,Qm, does (P and Q) follow as a conclusion? ". That is a question.
EB II, just a little more eloquent. I will avoid your threads in the future unless there is something of substance.

7. Originally Posted by steve_bank
Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank
How is that a question?
It is a question because I am asking "...if we have premises P1,...,Pn, Q1,...,Qm, does (P and Q) follow as a conclusion? ". That is a question.
EB II, just a little more eloquent. I will avoid your threads in the future unless there is something of substance.
That is a gratuitous insult. I will appreciate if you avoid the threads instead of doing that.

8. Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank

EB II, just a little more eloquent. I will avoid your threads in the future unless there is something of substance.
That is a gratuitous insult. I will appreciate if you avoid the threads instead of doing that.
Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank

EB II, just a little more eloquent. I will avoid your threads in the future unless there is something of substance.
That is a gratuitous insult. I will appreciate if you avoid the threads instead of doing that.

More critique than insult.

On the other thread you first condescended. Then you tried credibility be reference and association with AI along with logic jargon. A subtle insult.

Keep in mind you recently trashed EB by saying you created an OP better than the usual EB stuff.

I will avoid your threads. These threads never seem to go anywhere. If you reply to my posts I will not see them.

9. This is a strange forum.

10. Originally Posted by steve_bank

Originally Posted by Angra Mainyu
Originally Posted by steve_bank

EB II, just a little more eloquent. I will avoid your threads in the future unless there is something of substance.
That is a gratuitous insult. I will appreciate if you avoid the threads instead of doing that.

More critique than insult.

On the other thread you first condescended. Then you tried credibility be reference and association with AI along with logic jargon. A subtle insult.

Keep in mind you recently trashed EB by saying you created an OP better than the usual EB stuff.

I will avoid your threads. These threads never seem to go anywhere. If you reply to my posts I will not see them.
You're just making stuff up. No, I did not do what you claimed I did. You believe I did, for some reason I do not know.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•