Search results for query: *

This argument may be a bit difficult to parse, but it is definitely either valid or not valid. So, if you have an opinion, thanks to share it. EB

In your personal opinion, do you feel that the following implication is valid or invalid? And either way, can you try to explain why? Thank you to vote before posting any comment. EB

Here is an interesting example to try your wits... This is one philosopher, Vann McGee, who in 1986 proposed a counterexample to the Modus Ponens, no less! Here is the thing: Anyone understands what's going on here? EB

Ah, here is a very interesting piece of logic. I give the general form of the argument first, and then three straightforward applications of the general form. Thank you to say whether you think all these arguments are valid, or only some, or none. Thank you to cast your vote before posting...

Democratic regimes in most developed countries seem to evolve a cultural selection within themselves. Human beings tend to reproduce according essentially to opportunity and other natural determinations, such as attractiveness and sexual pulsion. There is a natural cultural bias since...

Do we know of any functional difference between the neurons of a human and the neurons of other species, say pigs, ants, and worms? EB

This is a poll. Thank you to vote before posting comments. It seems plausible, if not rather likely, that one day humans will be able to build machines more intelligent than themselves. This would likely have all sorts of consequences, some of them good, some of them bad, for humanity as a...

Are you able to explain what would be illogical in the implication: Thanks for sharing your expertise. EB

How is the idea expressed in classical propositional logic that one event caused another one event? For example: Please read the question carefully. Please don't go into the usual wild and nonsensical answers most people here usually do. If you understand both English and human deductive...

The problem of induction as a basis for knowledge is that new facts we discover may, and very often do, contradict our past inductive inferences. We are thereby forcibly led to accept, again and again and again, that we didn't know what we thought, and often vehemently asserted, that we knew...

What solution do you give to this puzzle? I give three different formulations, if that can help. The original one is supposed to be the last one here... I give here my own view on this, hidden to not influence anyone... We don't have any relevant information as to the relation between the...

Why does mathematics works? All is said in Wikipedia's article on Mathematics: Mathematics works because, and only to the extent that, it is logical. We got our logic through natural selection so, presumably, it was thoroughly tested over something like the 525 million years of the evolution...

There is no difficulty in assuming that we don't actually know anything about the material world. We don't even need to claim to know that we know nothing about it since we may believe it is the case, or indeed believe it is not the case. It won't make any difference if we can only have beliefs...

Initially, mathematics was the systematic deduction of the logical consequences of axioms, axioms understood to constitute together, somehow, a model of some particular aspect of the real world. The most historically glorified example of that is probably Euclid's geometry: The aspect of that...

Here is another interesting argument: I'll give a straightforward application of it: It's seriously more complicated than usual, so please take all the time you need to answer the two questions. Question 1: Do you think that this argument is logically valid, and why? Question 2: Do you...

Here is an interesting logical argument: Do you personally think this argument is logically valid? Thank you to cast a vote before posting any comment. Please note you can vote for several options. EB

Yes, and this his is a very simple logical point. I know that p implies that p is true. This is fundamental to knowledge. And if p is true, then there is no possibility that p is false. Thus, if I know that p, then there is no possibility that p be false. However, if you don't know that there...

We use abstractions to think about the world. Specifically, an abstraction is meant to refer to some part of the world. There are different levels of abstraction because we can use an abstraction to refer to the part of the world already referred to by different abstractions we have already in...

There is a fundamental difference the Brain-in-a-vat argument and the idea that our entire world is a simulation running on a computer. The Brain-in-a-vat seems within the reach of even human technology. In other words, it is a highly convincing and realistic scenario. A brain in a vat would...

Here is an argument. Please take all the time necessary to make up your mind about it... Once you think you have it figured out, thank you to vote to say whether you accept this argument as valid or not (i.e. logically valid). Please note I'm interested in whether you personally accept the...