Freethought & Rationalism Archive

J-D · 11-03-2009, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

No, it's not.

I've taken three college-level logic courses. How many have you taken?

So, are you implying that you got 100% from start to finish for all of your "three college-level logic courses?

Are you implying that you did not get any thing wrong or did not encounter any problems with logics?

These questions MUST LOGICALLY follow.

The logical merit (if any) of your position is not increased by the use of CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or increased font size, and it isn't increased by ENDLESS REPETITION either.

If your position really is supported by logic, then you should be able to illustrate that by using the format of formal logic to present it. So far you have FAILED to do so.

aa5874 · 11-03-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, are you implying that you got 100% from start to finish for all of your "three college-level logic courses?

Are you implying that you did not get any thing wrong or did not encounter any problems with logics?

These questions MUST LOGICALLY follow.

The logical merit (if any) of your position is not increased by the use of CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or increased font size, and it isn't increased by ENDLESS REPETITION either.

If your position really is supported by logic, then you should be able to illustrate that by using the format of formal logic to present it. So far you have FAILED to do so.

Well, this question must logically follow.

Why did you use CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or or increased font size if it does not increase the logical merit of your position?

J-D · 11-03-2009, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

The logical merit (if any) of your position is not increased by the use of CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or increased font size, and it isn't increased by ENDLESS REPETITION either.

If your position really is supported by logic, then you should be able to illustrate that by using the format of formal logic to present it. So far you have FAILED to do so.

Well, this question must logically follow.

Why did you use CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or or increased font size if it does not increase the logical merit of your position?

As a rhetorical device to place ironic emphasis on my point. But the appositeness of that technique depends on its being a response to your earlier behaviour, which did not have the same justification.

aa5874 · 11-03-2009, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Well, this question must logically follow.

Why did you use CAPITAL LETTERS or bolding or or increased font size if it does not increase the logical merit of your position?

As a rhetorical device to place ironic emphasis on my point. But the appositeness of that technique depends on its being a response to your earlier behaviour, which did not have the same justification.

You may be far better at rhetoric than logic.

J-D · 11-03-2009, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

As a rhetorical device to place ironic emphasis on my point. But the appositeness of that technique depends on its being a response to your earlier behaviour, which did not have the same justification.

You may be far better at rhetoric than logic.

I don't know. Maybe I am. That's not the issue. Maybe I'm better at logic than you are at logic. That's not the issue either. The issue is whether you can back up your claims about what logic dictates. So far you haven't.

Doug Shaver · 11-04-2009, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

I've taken three college-level logic courses. How many have you taken?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

are you implying that you got 100% from start to finish

If you knew what was taught about implication in an introductory logic course, you'd know the answer to that question and wouldn't bother asking.

aa5874 · 11-04-2009, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

I've taken three college-level logic courses. How many have you taken?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, are you implying that you got 100% from start to finish for all of your "three college-level logic courses?

Are you implying that you did not get any thing wrong or did not encounter any problems with logics?

These questions MUST LOGICALLY follow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

If you knew what was taught about implication in an introductory logic course, you'd know the answer to that question and wouldn't bother asking.

Your response to my queries or questions does not appear logical. What was taught and what was learnt must be taken into consideration.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.