I think...this whole thread is twisted.

kisses to you WW--

Logical contrapositive it is, wofa. You get the extra credit. And I say the cognitive dissonance of having a logical fallacy embedded in a joke about René Descartes just makes all that much funnier.

Oh, and the name of the fallacy is Denying the Antecedent.

I think only good thoughts; therefore a sharp pen is my yin.

Heh. I'm so balanced I've got equilibrium up the yin-yang.

Thanks for the laffs, Milum.

TEd: I think, then I come back to the thurfathe.

yesl she knits, but does she knit any lions?

look for yourself-- i have a photo gallery of my knitting (and a few photo's of the interior of my apartment-)

New photo's get added all the time...

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v299/oftroy/

actually the gallery doesn't hold photo of everything i have knit--only about 90%--missing is the bear--which my granddaughter said was the best present she has ever recieved. (i suppose it could have been a lion- it was a generic animal, really)

i finished the pink pom pom sweater, she has named it a gingerbread sweater--cause it looks like sprinkles you'd put on a gingerbread cookie--that's what comes of watching Shrek.

if your not careful, i'll add the links to the geek knitting sites-- were you can learn about the relationship between knit and purl/hex and bin, or other interesting (well to me!) mathmatical relationships and knitting.
(--PS. i do often use LION Brand yarn--does that count for knitting lions?)

knit any lions

you ink, because you're in a pen state?

I think; therefore I'm a library

Shameless Carpalattery, themilum.

I thought you were above that.

Hey, I've got a variation on your game.

Instead of linking a notable's thinking with something only the notable would find credible, why not invite people to identify a notable by their actual characteristics.

For instance, who is this?

I think --- hard but not deep.

I think --- often but not much.

I think --- more of my thinking than anyone else does.

Extra credit if you have the courage to say who it is.

But what I do when I think is more precisely defined in...
OED third edition, 1886, p. 996-97 3rd. para.
def. (#7), nexus Brt. P.432 1842 & Adm pp 348-49 1864
Oxford Press London, England: copyright pending.


okay, first off there is no "third edition" of the OED. the ongoing *online update of the 2nd edition (and supplements) is (so far) referred to only as the New Edition. then, if anything had been published in 1886, it would have been a 0th edition folio, as the 1st edition wasn't published in toto until 1928. and the publisher is Oxford University Press.

if you're going to parody something, at least get the *facts straight,
-joe (pedantic to a fault) friday

(isn't that the contrapositive?)
just thought i'd provide a quick, ultra-basic guide to logic and if/then statements:

Given the statement......If A, then B.
The converse is..........If B, then A.
The inverse is...........If not A, then not B.
The contrapositive is....If not B, then not A.

(For a more concrete example, try substituting "you have red hair" for A and "you have hair" for B.)
Note: I'm not trying to be a know-it-all, I just thought you all might want to know

>>>>okay, first off there is no "third edition" of the OED. the ongoing *online update of the 2nd edition (and supplements) is (so far) referred to only as the New Edition. then, if anything had been published in 1886, it would have been a 0th edition folio, as the 1st edition wasn't published in toto until 1928. and the publisher is Oxford University Press.

if you're going to parody something, at least get the *facts straight,
-joe (pedantic to a fault) friday

>>>>Note: I'm not trying to be a know-it-all, I just thought you all might want to know

No stress gonold. We're all here to have fun and to learn. As you see from all of our posts, everybody is welcome to add their two-cents' worth. I'm sure nobody thinks you were trying to be a know-it-all so opine away!

Inverse, then, not contrapositive. Got it. Thanks. (I think that means you should get half my extra-credit point, too! )

I appreciate your showing off there. I've never studied logic and only know anything about it at all in a most roundabout way. This is a great little mnemotic.

In reply to:

---

who is this?

I think --- hard but not deep.
I think --- often but not much.
I think --- more of my thinking than anyone else does.

Extra credit if you have the courage to say who it is.

---

I certainly don't have that sort of courage; but we could convert it into a vote:

[ ] grapho
[ ] gnat
[ ] themgmt
[ ] plutarch
[ ] wordminstral
[ ] all of the above



THE MGMT

we could convert it into a vote:[ ] grapho[ ] gnat[ ] themgmt[ ] plutarch[ ] wordminstral[ ] all of the above

It doesn't take any courage to pick any of those, snoot.

But, picking a Carpal Tunnel, that's another kettle of carp altogether. Especially for THE MGMT.

ok, so i have a logic question--

its a sort of the "do you still beat your wife?" deal.

you know, if you answer the question, NO, it implies you used to beat your wife, and if you answer YES well its worse!

what are these cleverly worded argruements called?

there are some who ACCUSE (damn, complain, etc) that older members suffer from group think. (the older members are identifed as Carpels--from the stupid title the soft ware assigns)

If you disagree with the accuser, he claims you are part of the old timers cabal, and part of the 'group' he is accusing of group think. (agreeing with him is worse!)

so what is the term for a logical falicy?

how do i say, NO, i don't beat my wife, and never did,--with out sounding defensive! when in truth --you've done nothing wrong?

as an aside, i vote for all of the above

a 0th edition folio

My high school library had the original subscription in fascicles version of the OED which had been bound in increasingly modern bindings. That's the one in which I read etymologies and began to wonder what Gothic and Old Saxon looked like.

fascicles

cool. very facile.

so, how do this and icicle (or popsicle!) relate? fascis = bundle, but? I don't think of icicles as being bundles.

so what is the term for [this] logical fallacy?

In French they say, "Qui s'excuse, s'accuse", Of Troy.

But, actually, I wasn't thinking of all Carpals, and certainly I was not thinking of you.

Shall I give you another clue?

how do this and icicle (or popsicle!) relate?

The second c in icicle isn't there in the OE word that icicle derives from: gicel. Probably from a folk etymology based on ice.

Fascicle (or fascicule) is from Latin fasciculus. -culus (like German -chen and -lein) is really two diminutive suffixes in a row: the -cV and the -lV. Fascis (origin of the word fascist) is indead a bundle. You can see a fascis on the back of the old Mercury dime. It was a bundle of sticks around an axe. The axe was a ceremonial weapon (kind of like a mace) that Roman lictores carried. Different magistrates had the right to have different numbers of lictores carry fasces around and protect their person (and office, I suppose).

Shall I give you another clue?

OK, so here's the clue:

How many "falicies" do we know around here?

Given the statement......If A, then B.
The converse is..........If B, then A.
The inverse is...........If not A, then not B.
The contrapositive is....If not B, then not A.

Goldenrod is, of course, right. I was jumping ahead of myself when I spoke of the logical contrapositive. I give you full credit for your answer, wofa.

Just the pathetic ones???

Or the ones with testicles attached? Though those two categories may not be mutually exclusive, you unnerstand.

Given the statement......If A, then B.
The converse is..........If B, then A.
The inverse is...........If not A, then not B.
The contrapositive is....If not B, then not A.

Correct me if I'm wrong on the line of thinking here but the logic above seems to be a bit flawed.

If A then B.

"If I have a beard then I am a man" True (presuming that we excluding non-humans

If B then A.

"If I am a man then I have a beard" Not necessarily true

If Not A then Not B

"If I am not man then I don't have a beard" - True (in the strictest sense of the word)

If Not B then Not A

"If I don't have a beard then I am not a man" - definitely not true

Okay, the definitions of the words are correct. I just have a problem with the faulty logic.

Edit: Sorry I seem to have posted the above twice!

Okay, the definitions of the words are correct. I just have a problem with the faulty logic.

As I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, but these terms are just the names for each of the four logical statements, and have nothing at all to say about the verity of the statements.

Gotcha. I was reading your definitions from a logical perspective and not from a descriptive one. I've re-read it and it now makes a lot of sense now I see what you were getting at.

your definitions

Er, I think you mean gonoldothrond, not jheem (i.e., me).