Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4345491" data-attributes="member: 71571">Here is your logic, presented to you in plain form.On a page in the book, it refers to an object using a noun of the singular inflection.That object must therefore be a singular object, even tho it is a collection of objects.That is your logic.  Convert to logic using variables.According to reference, in regards to situations of type S, whenever an object, A, is refered to with an inflection of a noun with quality B, then it must contain quality B without any possibility of variance.Type S is where weapon damage dice are refered toobject A is in this case, a weapon with 2dx as its listed damagequality B is in this case, speaking of 2dx as tho it were a single die and not two.Now, no one is disagreeing that S is the situation refered to, or that object A does not exist, or that it was not refered to as 'damage die.'However.... This argument fails due to invalid form.  Proof by counter example.Let quality B be instead 'speaking of 2dx as tho it were plural dice'This changes the argument to this:On a page in the book, it refers to an object using a noun of the plural inflection.That object must therefore be a plurality of objects, even tho it is a collection of objects.Now, seperating both arguments into premises and conclusion is rather simple.Here are the premises:On a page in the book, it refers to an object using a noun of the singular inflection.On a page in the book, it refers to an object using a noun of the plural inflection.Both premises share the same truth value, so the argument should come out with a true result no matter what, if your logic is correct.Now compare the conclusions:That object must therefore be a singular object, even tho it is a collection of objects.That object must therefore be a plurality of objects, even tho it is a collection of objects.singular means that the cardinality of objects is equal to exactly 1.plurality means that the cardinality of objects is greater than 1 or equal to 0.The cardinality of objects cannot both be 1 and 0, and the cardinality of objects cannot both be 1 and greater than 1.Ergo, the argument comes out with two completely different conclusions that are mutually exclusive, despite the introduction of premises with verified valid truth values.Therefore, the argument form is invalid.  Therefore the argument is invalid.  Therefore the logic is false and contradictory.Proof by Contradiction.  Critical Thinking 001.Now, here's my argument given back to you.I roll with multiple dice.  Therefore, there are multiple dice.Let's substitute into this other qualities to see if the argument form works.I roll with my homeys.  Therefore, there are homeys.I roll with the [metaphorical] punches.  Therefore, there are [metaphorical] punches.I roll with a cigarette roller.  Therefore, there is a cigarette roller.Hard to argue against a tautology.</blockquote>

Verification