Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does a Death Ward Protect against Phantasmal Killer?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Xylix" data-source="post: 504444" data-attributes="member: 9089"><p>*Chuckle*</p><p></p><p>I probably should bother editing my posts, but they usually end up so darn long!</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not quite, I stated that those that agreeded with the premises must agree, if they are logical.</p><p></p><p>The premises are the fundmental statments:</p><p></p><p>e.g.</p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Point out that he could not get everywhere in time.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>Point out that you can see what you parents buy, and if you are careful you can even show that those labled from Santa where indeed bought by your parents.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p></p><p>If they dissagreed with teh premises I would be forced to prove those (or show them likely) to get them to accept them. To do that I would have to make more premisies.</p><p></p><p>and so on and so on....</p><p></p><p>Eventually one of two things would happen:</p><p></p><p>#1: We would reach a stage where I managed to construct an argument (by prooving premisies as necessary) that consists of only premisies that they agree with. If this happened if they where logical, and the logic of my argument was sound then they should agree (this is inductive, in deductive they MUST agree).</p><p></p><p>The problem with inductive is they can still believe, what is important though is they accept their postion is unlikey.</p><p></p><p>#2: There will be a point where one reaches a fundementally accepted premise. That is not shared. Such a premise is one that is accepted by the individual without question. Perhaps things like 'Murder is wrong, Nachos is good, the DMs manual is sacred, etc....'</p><p></p><p>In any case a fundmentally accepted premise is about possible to convince another not to accept, as they accept this without question.</p><p></p><p>If you cannot disprove this fundemental premise, or get them to accept it (as you can never proove your own fundmental premise without first removing is fundmentalness, which risks disprooving it). Then the argument cannot continue. As such both parties recognize their differances, aplaud their use of logic and leave.</p><p></p><p>If two people are presenting opposing ideas then </p><p></p><p>#3 : The opposite occures, your argument is disprooved. In this case if the other is accepted as the most likely resultant you move to that if you are logical. If there is another likely (in your mind) resultant you might go there instead. In this case the argument resumes with one party presenting a new argument.</p><p></p><p></p><p>there is of course....</p><p></p><p>#4 : Everybody gets tired of talking.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The stereotypical Christmas Santa is the only one I cared about. Afterall this is only an example.</p><p></p><p>As such when I used santa you should subsitute it for 'stereotypical Christmas Santa'</p><p></p><p>You incorrectly presumed I was refering to all Santa's, just like I incorrectly presumed everyone would understand I would be talking about the 'sterotypical christmas santa'</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nah, I only care about the Neutral ones....</p><p></p><p>When I started getting arguments that consisted of one statement I decided bothering with anyone else was pointless.</p><p></p><p>Then after dealing with more raw statments I decided I would be happy if people just started attacking my premises.</p><p></p><p>As such I do suppose my goal is partially successful. At this point I wouldn't mind you destroying my argument as long as the board started using logic more commonly in arguments. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Afterall, I would merely house rule the result any way <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Bring the fun! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Xylix, post: 504444, member: 9089"] *Chuckle* I probably should bother editing my posts, but they usually end up so darn long! Not quite, I stated that those that agreeded with the premises must agree, if they are logical. The premises are the fundmental statments: e.g. [i] Point out that he could not get everywhere in time. Point out that you can see what you parents buy, and if you are careful you can even show that those labled from Santa where indeed bought by your parents. [/i] If they dissagreed with teh premises I would be forced to prove those (or show them likely) to get them to accept them. To do that I would have to make more premisies. and so on and so on.... Eventually one of two things would happen: #1: We would reach a stage where I managed to construct an argument (by prooving premisies as necessary) that consists of only premisies that they agree with. If this happened if they where logical, and the logic of my argument was sound then they should agree (this is inductive, in deductive they MUST agree). The problem with inductive is they can still believe, what is important though is they accept their postion is unlikey. #2: There will be a point where one reaches a fundementally accepted premise. That is not shared. Such a premise is one that is accepted by the individual without question. Perhaps things like 'Murder is wrong, Nachos is good, the DMs manual is sacred, etc....' In any case a fundmentally accepted premise is about possible to convince another not to accept, as they accept this without question. If you cannot disprove this fundemental premise, or get them to accept it (as you can never proove your own fundmental premise without first removing is fundmentalness, which risks disprooving it). Then the argument cannot continue. As such both parties recognize their differances, aplaud their use of logic and leave. If two people are presenting opposing ideas then #3 : The opposite occures, your argument is disprooved. In this case if the other is accepted as the most likely resultant you move to that if you are logical. If there is another likely (in your mind) resultant you might go there instead. In this case the argument resumes with one party presenting a new argument. there is of course.... #4 : Everybody gets tired of talking. The stereotypical Christmas Santa is the only one I cared about. Afterall this is only an example. As such when I used santa you should subsitute it for 'stereotypical Christmas Santa' You incorrectly presumed I was refering to all Santa's, just like I incorrectly presumed everyone would understand I would be talking about the 'sterotypical christmas santa' Nah, I only care about the Neutral ones.... When I started getting arguments that consisted of one statement I decided bothering with anyone else was pointless. Then after dealing with more raw statments I decided I would be happy if people just started attacking my premises. As such I do suppose my goal is partially successful. At this point I wouldn't mind you destroying my argument as long as the board started using logic more commonly in arguments. ;) Afterall, I would merely house rule the result any way :D Bring the fun! ;) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does a Death Ward Protect against Phantasmal Killer?
Top