Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Experimental Thread!
    #2988239 -

I was sitting in philosophy class today, thinking about how most good philosophy arguments can be reduced to the premises and a conclusion, and how much easier communication and persuasion would be in real life if people used these formula. I thought this would be a good place to toy with that idea :smile:

So, I designate this thread a mini forum, with the only guidelines that any new ideas or counter arguments posted on it should follow premises-conclusion form, which I'll explain below. In other words, if there was any thread you wanted to start on this forum, and wanted to have it debated in a coherent way, post it on here too, and use the form to explain why you believe what you believe, and people can respond and clearly explain what they think, and we'll see how it ends up different from other threads!

I'll describe the system in my next post.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2988276 -

So, the way this works, as you would be taught in most philosophy classes, is you list a bunch of premises, facts or ideas or observations that work towards a conclusion. The premises alone, if all true, should _prove_ the conclusion to be true. A simple version would look like this:

Premise 1: All men are mortal
Premise 2: Socrates was a man
Conclusion: Socrates was mortal

This is simple, but follows the structure and is an easy example. It makes it easy for someone to disagree and frame their disagreement too, as I'll show down here.

Premise 1: Taking a human life is murder
Premise 2: Abortion takes a human life
Conclusion: Abortion is murder.

Now, people are going to have more mixed feelings about this one, but it should still be clear how to object to it. Remember that every premise should be necessary for the conclusion, and the conclusion, provided every premise is true, should follow from the premises.

The obvious objection would be that some people don't believe premise 2 to be true, therefore making the argument unsound. People are unlikely to object to premise 1, and the conclusion is not objectionable on its own (you either object to a premise, like i just did, or you object that the premises are insufficient to prove the conclusion).

I'll start this thread in the next post with a premises/conclusion statement, and if anyone wants to start debate there, that's cool, or if you want to post your own, unrelated statement in that form, it's cool too. Let's see how this works!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2988340 -

p: i like this idea.
p: ideas that i like are good.
C: this is a good idea!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2988398 -

Premise 1: Knowledge comes from one of two sources: our sensory experiences, and our reasoning processes.
Premise 2: It is impossible to know something that hasn't occured without a sense experience or a process of reasoning.
Premise 3: I have found no logical reason to belief there exists any supernatural entities
Premise 4: I have never had a sense experience involving supernatural entities.
Conclusion: It is impossible for me to know if supernatural beings exist.

This make sense to everyone? This isn't supposed to be unarguable, so if you disagree, fire away!

If you have a better discussion to get into, by all means, start it, this example i just came up with right now and isn't somehting I'm especially passionate about.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2988468 -

Premise 1: Police abuse people for the government.
Premise 2: The Government claims to know morality.
Premise 3: Morality is not to hurt and to love.
Conclusion: Fuck the police and the government.

Ok fuck all the bs. This is what happened today. My friends are driving and there is a cop in back of him. He has a broken speedometer so he pulls over in a dead end. I say he is coming and they think i am joking. The cop finds us at the dead end and treats us like shit. Two of my friends were arrested and brought to the station for a bowl and a half gram of weed. While my friends are in the police car, me and my other friend were sitting on the road. I said the cop "Do you believe in karma" and he replied "yes". Then he goes on and says "Oh are you gonna get all philosophical on me?" I replied "What did we do wrong". He said "You had marijuana in the car." I shut my mouth. The other police officer who was a complete asshole said to me "I got 2 more pairs of cuffs if you have anything else in the car" I immediately stood up and put my hands behind my back and he wouldn't put the cuffs on me but he jumped a little when i stood up. I am very skeptical about police now and very very very frustrated and angry to a point where I want action.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: Philanthropist]
    #2988798 -

Hmm, not exactly what I had in mind, but if someone wants to respond, work with it! I want to see where this thread goes and I'm not going to try and guide it anywhere except what happens naturally.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2988962 -

P: I exist
P: You exist
C: We exist

:crazy:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: 2Experimental]
    #2989000 -

w00t

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: Philanthropist]
    #2989738 -

Premise 1: Police abuse people for the government.

Counter argument: Police need to keep their jobs to provide for themselves and their families and therefore will follow orders whether they are in agreement or not.

Premise 2: The Government claims to know morality.

Counter argument: Governments elected by citizens enforce laws created and agreed upon by the majority of citizens; the mistake therefor is that the governing body itself is liable for iresponsible acts performed by elected officials.

Premise 3: Morality is not to hurt and to love.

Counter argument: (I don't have a counter argument)

Conclusion: Fuck the police and the government.

Counter conclusion: Erroneous conclusion

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: Philanthropist]
    #2990046 -

Philanthropist said:
Premise 1: Police abuse people for the government.
Premise 2: The Government claims to know morality.
Premise 3: Morality is not to hurt and to love.
Conclusion: Fuck the police and the government.


No birds are pigs
No pigs can fly
Therefore
No birds can fly.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: Lazerouth]
    #2990058 -

You mean Nobirds? Or planes? Oh crap I think I'm on the wrong track...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2990099 -

god is that which none greater can be conceived of....
oh fuck it, it's been so long since i was a student of philosophy.... *sighs* hope you recognize the phrase, though. i personally think it's a very reductionalistic way of thinking.... a good tool to keep the reasoning mind sharp, but that's it.


--------------------
Everything is better than it was the last time.  I'm good.

If we could look into each others hearts, and understand the unique challenges each of us faces, I think we would treat each other much more gently, with more love, patience, tolerance, and care.

It takes a lot of courage to go out there and radiate your essence.

I know you scared, you should ask us if we scared too.  If you was there, and we just knew you cared too.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2990135 -

This concept could benefit greatly from the integration of "English Prime".. in English prime, ( http://www.rawilson.com/quantum.html ) everything is written to take into consideration perception and the lack of support for each individual premise.

Observe the changes that result from your abortion example:

In english:

Premise 1: Taking a human life is murder
Premise 2: Abortion takes a human life
Conclusion: Abortion is murder.

In english prime:

Premise 1: Taking a human life appears to stop the human's existance beyond physical form.
Premise 2: Abortion seems to take human life.
Conclusion: Abortion MAY be the equivalent to murder, but that appears to be a subjective conclusion; said conclusion holds it's basis in relative perception and relative moral opinion.

Yeah, I know, you have to read more and write more in English prime... but I think this is a prime example (no pun intended, heh) of it's useful application.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: JacquesCousteau]
    #2990524 -

English prime is interesting, but using it in philosophy undermines the whole point of trying to prove an assertion at all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2990564 -

On the contrary... using it in philosophy completely bypasses the false goal of asserting one's point, to get to the real goal: A fair balance that allows and accounts for the fact that every single person experiences reality through only their own perception.

I don't want to get too off target on your thread, so I'll just say this:

While I acknowledge that English prime doesn't make for heated debates, I think that's rather the whole idea. It allows communication of concept without ego getting involved. If one's views are not considered the only reality, then the ego does not feel the need to protect said reality by debating.

But I guess that all defeats the purpose of your thread... heh.

So carry on, I'll go back to my usual sidelines position.  :grin:

P.S. Just my 2 cents, by the way.

Edited by JacquesCousteau (08/11/04 09:57 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2991446 -

1) if A then B
2) D
conclusion: C or !C
:crazy2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: castaway]
    #2991697 -

castaway said:
Premise 1: Police abuse people for the government.

Counter argument: Police need to keep their jobs to provide for themselves and their families and therefore will follow orders whether they are in agreement or not.

Premise 2: The Government claims to know morality.

Counter argument: Governments elected by citizens enforce laws created and agreed upon by the majority of citizens; the mistake therefor is that the governing body itself is liable for iresponsible acts performed by elected officials.

Premise 3: Morality is not to hurt and to love.

Counter argument: (I don't have a counter argument)

Conclusion: Fuck the police and the government.

Counter conclusion: Erroneous conclusion


the quoting is to complicated.



P1.govts are elected by the minority of citizens(as the majority doesnt vote), those elected then vote on laws.

P2.very little legislation is voted on by citizens.

C.govts dont represent the majority of citizens they govern.


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: BleaK]
    #2993466 -

FUBAR !!

~ scandal ~

I love it!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: castaway]
    #2993486 -

huh?


--------------------
"You cannot trust in law, unless you can trust in people. If you can trust in people, you don't need law." -J. Mumma

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Experimental Thread! [Re: ferago2]
    #2995947 -

Aristotle is pretty fun. Have you started studying zeno yet ferago? That guy knew how to argue.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Argument by Design Bullfrog1 1,684 10 12/09/07 07:38 PM
by Holly
* ESSAY:Psychedelic induced mystical experiences by Alan Watts tekramrepus 3,066 6 03/21/03 11:43 AM
by pattern
* does a "Bad experience" make subsequent exps. bad? xfluffybunnyx 1,422 9 11/14/02 07:46 PM
by Strumpling
* The *OFFICIAL* Co-Incidences Thread
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 nubious 5,845 61 07/29/03 01:07 PM
by Source
* please interpret my "alien" experiance
( 1 2 all )		 Anonymous 1,971 22 11/28/02 05:01 PM
by dumlovesyou
* Near Death Experiences
( 1 2 all )		 Earth_Droid 3,364 35 02/15/03 09:59 AM
by shlauncha
* Inducing mystical experiences
( 1 2 all )		 Metasyn 4,526 29 03/14/17 10:00 PM
by beforethedawn
* Contact Experiment
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 ShroomismM 14,280 106 09/15/02 09:08 PM
by Swami

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,418 topic views. 0 members, 27 guests and 13 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.