# Thread: If a = b, then 1 = 2

1. Originally Posted by steve_bank
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Originally Posted by steve_bank
I'd call it non sequiter. Premis and conclusion not connected logically.

If it is raining cats are dogs.
This isn't anything like an explanation.

You are repeating the commonplace answer as if it was any explanation.

EB
if a=b then 1=2.
if it is raining then the gas tank is full
fido is a dog therefore the cow jumped over the moon
fido is a dog therefore sasha is a cat

non sequitur. No connection between premise and conclusion. That is my explanation. I believe non sequitur is just a formal way of saying nonsense.

As a logician have you Carol's, also a logician, Jaberwoky?
The conditional is more akin to a premise than it is to an argument. While an argument may be fallacious, the worst a premise might be is false.

P1: if a=b, then 1=2
P2: a=b
Therefore, C: 1=2

That’s logical and a valid argument. In fact, I might go as far as saying that because it’s valid, it’s logical. The error isn’t in form but in falsity. While it might be true that the antecedent is true, the consequent is false. Since the conditional is not error free, i’d submit that the proposition is false, but that says nothing as to the validity of the argument.

#### Posting Permissions

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