Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: If a = b, then 1 = 2

  1. Top | #11
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Rhea; 10-11-2019 at 03:21 AM. Reason: Consistency

  2. Top | #12
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,952
    Rep Power
    12
    if a=b then 1=2.

    .For a valid argument conclusion must follow from premise. 1=2 does not follow from a=b. The argument is nonsense. I'd say it is non sequitur.

    fido is a dog therefore sasha is a cat. Both statements may be true but the argument is invalid. Sasha is a cat does not follow from fido is a dog. Non sequitur.

  3. Top | #13
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    if a=b then 1=2.

    .For a valid argument conclusion must follow from premise. 1=2 does not follow from a=b. The argument is nonsense. I'd say it is non sequitur.

    fido is a dog therefore sasha is a cat. Both statements may be true but the argument is invalid. Sasha is a cat does not follow from fido is a dog. Non sequitur.
    I don’t see an argument. What I see is a statement.

  4. Top | #14
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,952
    Rep Power
    12
    I see a conditional argument. If a then b. a is premise and b conclusion, a and be can be true or false. Either way I see the statement as nonsense for reasons stated.

    If it is raining then I will carry an umbrella.

  5. Top | #15
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,293
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,318
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by steve_bank View Post
    I see a conditional argument. If a then b. a is premise and b conclusion, a and be can be true or false. Either way I see the statement as nonsense for reasons stated.

    If it is raining then I will carry an umbrella.
    I see something that is a conditional, but what I see is not an argument. It’s a statement, a conditional statement. ‘a’ is not a premise. It’s an antecedent. ‘b’ is not a conclusion; it’s a consequent.

    It’s a conditional statement with an antecedent and consequent. It’s not an argument with a premise and conclusion.

    Argument, no.
    Statement, yes.

  6. Top | #16
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    4,952
    Rep Power
    12
    To me it is semantics. I am used to referring to any logical expression including formal and Boolean logic an an argument.

    if a then b. logical expression and argument being synonymous.

    Every logical argument or expression should reduce to some form of formal logic.

    if a then not b.

    a logical true or false
    b logical true or false

    truth table
    a b
    f t
    t f

    b = !a Boolean

    if it is sunshine I will not take an umbrella.

    If a then not b

    A true sunny false not sunny
    B true umbrella false no umbrella.

    If a=b then 1=2. Nonsense, I don’t think you can make a truth table and hence no formal valid expression. That is my test for validity.

  7. Top | #17
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,306
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,968
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Are you able to explain what would be illogical in the implication:

    If a = b, then 1 = 2
    Thanks for sharing your expertise.
    EB
    I don’t think faulty and logical is inconsistent.
    A false conclusion is inconsistent with a valid argument and true premises, so yes, they can be.

    But true, a false conclusion doesn't imply the argument is not valid.

    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    The logic makes sense. If P, then Q. Revealing that Q is obviously false doesn’t alter the logic.
    It doesn't alter the logic but it doesn't make the argument valid either.

    Also, there are cases when a false conclusion implies that the argument is not valid.

    Anyway, for now, you are not really answering the question.

    Or are you saying that if a = b, then 1 = 2?
    EB

  8. Top | #18
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,588
    Rep Power
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Are you able to explain what would be illogical in the implication:

    If a = b, then 1 = 2
    Thanks for sharing your expertise.
    EB
    The failure in logic (what makes it illogical) is that the conclusion (1=2) does not follow the premise (A=B). A is not equal to 1 when B is equal to 2, by definition of the = symbol in the premise. It is in that way that the conclusion does not follow.

Posting Permissions

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