The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
blackkid
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

cause+effect=logic(cause and effect is logic)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
blackkid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,341 times Debate No: 65017
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (44)
Votes (1)

 

vi_spex

Pro

if you walk in the woods and eat a poisonous mushroom it dosnt matter what you think is going to happen if the mushroom is poisonous, and if you didn't eat it that logic wouldn't apply
blackkid

Con

Logic is purely conceptual (http://philosophy.lander.edu...) which in turn means that patterns are not a derivative of any logical process but instead that all logical processes are derivatives of patterns throughout the universe. Cause and effect is simply one standard that is relative to the observations and presentations of logic however logic itself, esp. inductive logic (http://www.chaosforum.com...), does not necessitate this behavior theoretically.

P1: All objects that are poisonous will harm animals.
P2: Humans are animals.
C: All objects that are poisonous will harm humans.

Using your mushroom premise this is unsound as (http://namyco.org...) some mushrooms are poisonous to common housepets like cats and dogs but not to humans and furthermore given the same quantity not all toxins are necessarily dangerous even between humans which is how Toxicology is based related to LD50 (http://biology.unm.edu...) charts. Note that there is no set amount but instead it is based on your size and weight. This is true of all toxicity even though the differentials can be so minute it does not matter.

Concluding cause and effect as a standard of logic should always produce sound deductive presentations if all the premises are accurate however this is also not true. For instance something as simple as an ice cube floating defeats the general rule that solids are heavier than their liquid states and will sink within them if allowed. Instead we note that ice cubes float, we know why, and the logic produced by this follows the actual pattern of behavior instead of the pattern of logic forcing the behavior.

Simple.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

there is no logic in fantasy, that's why I can imagine jumping of a cliff and slamming into the ground and nothing actually happens besides perhaps and emotional response, where as we can reason about this and come the conclusion that jumping off a cliff would be unreasonable, and what determines it is unreasonable is the cause and effect relation of my body and the ground, if I had the power of superman it would be reasonable for me to jump, yet it would be reasonable for me to jump if I wanted to die, because logic is so, yet if I was superman it would be unreasonable to jump if I wanted to die, as it is an insufficient way to kill myself, based on logic. logic is the measurement of reasonable

all poisonous objects will poison animals, cause and effect of the object being poisonous, matter determines this, it has nothing to do with what you think, because you can eat the object, and your thoughts doesn't change the result that you will get poisoned

its only a poisonous mushroom if its poisonous to my body, if an animal eats it and the animal can handle the poison the cause and effect relation is different

so there is no cause and effect relation causing these things with the ice cube? simple
blackkid

Con

"there is no logic in fantasy, that's why I can imagine jumping of a cliff and slamming into the ground and nothing actually happens besides perhaps and emotional response, where as we can reason about this and come the conclusion that jumping off a cliff would be unreasonable, and what determines it is unreasonable is the cause and effect relation of my body and the ground, if I had the power of superman it would be reasonable for me to jump, yet it would be reasonable for me to jump if I wanted to die, because logic is so, yet if I was superman it would be unreasonable to jump if I wanted to die, as it is an insufficient way to kill myself, based on logic. logic is the measurement of reasonable"

First, that hurt to read, and second that (ironically) makes no logical sense. You've actually created a logical case here by stating that if you were to jump off a cliff but could fly it would make sense (why?) or if you wanted to commit suicide you could leap off a cliff and you would die (though you could also just be bungee jumping and then you wouldn't die and you'd have a lot of fun while at it) so you concluded from your theoretical situation with parameters you set that the outcome should be X whatever that was.

You are actually proving me correct. Logic itself only works within those parameters; the statements inside of the parentheses are meant to be alternatives to your set implicit parameters and if taken they too are sound. The soundness of your mental exploration only persists because of exactly what I said; there is no derivative from a lack of observations. If you were on the moon for instance and you jumped off of a cliff you'd likely not die because you wouldn't gain the required speed to suffer the trauma and if you jumped off of a small ledge on Jupiter you would instantly be killed because of the gravitational pull of the planet. This too is logical exploration and theoretical as is most logic including what you just posed.

"all poisonous objects will poison animals, cause and effect of the object being poisonous, matter determines this, it has nothing to do with what you think, because you can eat the object, and your thoughts doesn't change the result that you will get poisoned ... its only a poisonous mushroom if its poisonous to my body, if an animal eats it and the animal can handle the poison the cause and effect relation is different"

Your proposition is that your thoughts do not alter your reality. The thing is that your thoughts and your reality are intrinsically linked; not only do your thoughts alter your reality your entire reality is alters your thoughts as well. You've proven this here through your statements regarding toxicity however you only look at the toxicity in relation to a standard of effect which means that it is only true when it is only true! That's incorrect. For instance the LD50 of water for a person that is 100 pounds is significantly different than the LD50 of water for someone that is 200 pounds. When we talk about shrooms (yes, the drug) you have the same effect plus you have tolerance and other minor players all working against the psilocybin in the system. The reaction is also not equivalent among drugs whether you are referring to alcohol which is common or the obscure such as Ritalin and different amounts have different effects based on a myriad of factors. It is the fact that there is no one specific simple answer to questions of this nature that make you wrong; there have been numerous studies on positivity and recovery from illness (http://abcnews.go.com...) as well as negativity and proneness to illness (http://www.berkeleywellness.com...) so the reality is that you actually could think your way out of certain death because apparently what you think matters more than what you face at times. Not always of course.

The second cursory problem is defining "poison". You say if it not poisonous by nature then it is simply not poisonous however that isn't true; quite a number of poisons are simply rendered inert, they are still poison, and if one loses the enzymes to maintain that inert state you can become susceptible to the poisons themselves and another case can just be method of ingestion for instance some snake venoms are inert in the stomach but if injected via fang will kill you (http://books.google.com...) which itself is an interesting reality! Exciting!

"so there is no cause and effect relation causing these things with the ice cube?"

This is a question that makes zero sense and thus cannot be answered.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

im not saying it would make sense, im saying its reasonable, and logic determines reason, reason the the concept of logic, cause and effect

is it unreasonable to jump off a cliff if I want to die, compared to eating vegetables?

well im not adding bungijumping you are, im talking about reality as it is.. where you can jump of a cliff and no bungee is necessarily attached to you, therefore its not implied in my example

you are twisting it m8

it is only true, when it is true, only now is true, anywhere beyond now is imaginary, false.

so you can jump of a cliff and imagine flying away and everything will be fine, you will not continue falling and splat?(if you are on earth and everything is as it is.........lul)

if no one can get poisoned, no poison exist
the effect of the poison is the cause of the poison

wauw, your saying cause and effect dosnt apply to your ice cube example, but that is only true if you imagine it, as there is no logic in fantasy
blackkid

Con

"im not saying it would make sense, im saying its reasonable, and logic determines reason, reason the the concept of logic, cause and effect"

If something does not make sense it is by nature not reasonable.

"is it unreasonable to jump off a cliff if I want to die, compared to eating vegetables?"

Depends on the parameters. You have better chance of living falling off of a 12' cliff than if you eat yew (http://www.countrylovers.co.uk...). In order for your scenario to work I have to accept your implicit parameters; what you mean is "Is it unreasonable to jump off of a [100'] cliff if I want to die, compared to eating [healthy and gainful] vegetables?", and those brackets are indicating your implicits. The entirety of your understanding is weakened just by the fact that you can only theoretically enforce your own thoughts and patterns but you circumvent your own arguments by also failing to have the language required to actualize your own thoughts and patterns sufficiently.

"well im not adding bungijumping you are, im talking about reality as it is.. where you can jump of a cliff and no bungee is necessarily attached to you, therefore its not implied in my example", but bungee jumping is real. You're not talking about reality as it is, you are talking about reality as you need to it to be to work within your framework, which is enjoyable and normal but also proves that logic is theoretical and you cannot produce a constant using it in actuality.

"you are twisting it m8", but of course. That is what Logic is for. Logic is nothing more than twisted observations conundrums and implicit and explicit combinations to create statements that allow for both communication and sound decision making. Twisting logic is nothing new, it's nothing rare, and it's nothing that effects reality at all; the truth is that whether it be the idea that flies simply spawn from meat and phlogerston causes fire or whether it be ebola being incurable and virii being 'dead but alive too' none of this effected by how you logically discern the world and while ideas may come and go the nature of the world need not change. "Cause and Effect" is merely a tool, it is an expression relating to an expected outcome given specific parameters, for instance your leaping off a cliff leading to death expresses that the cliff is high enough, you are unprotected and not resilient enough to survive the fall, no freak miracles keep you from death, and that death is actually even possible and you're not immortal. There are so many hidden parameters within parameters for logical statements that we don't even think of them. And this is why you are wrong; the very nature of Logic twists and turns far too much for you to be right about anything relative to the concrete nature of "what is".

"it is only true, when it is true, only now is true, anywhere beyond now is imaginary, false.", ah yes, X|X and the rules of the contemporary temporal value. Well, that's not true. It's not only untrue but it's actually ridiculously untrue. Let's say that you are reading this now, which you are, and if you are let's say that in two seconds after this period at the end of this sentence we see if you still exist. ... ... Congratulations! You exist. But was there ever any real doubt? Did I have to truly imagine you existing beyond that period? No. You won't cease to exist just because you can conceptualize not existing and thus again your logic proves false; the fact that you state you cannot forecast anything undermines the value of meteorology which does so with high accuracy modeling off of the patterns of the world.

"so you can jump of a cliff and imagine flying away and everything will be fine, you will not continue falling and splat?(if you are on earth and everything is as it is.........lul)", yes: http://www.wingsuitfly.com..., it's called a Wingsuit. I know, another parameter you did not think of.

"if no one can get poisoned, no poison exist, the effect of the poison is the cause of the poison", no, it's not. Not at all. We can note this because some substances are more toxic to specific populations than others even within the same species and genus. Poison is actually not a "property" but a classification of an interaction. Basically what makes poison what it is happens to be how it chemically reacts to the body of recipient not based on it's physical substance itself. This is why tolerances, resistances, and various other things need to be taken into account; a common poison for instance is alcohol, it is very much so poisonous, and yet humans don't die and drink it for fun? Are they dumb? Or is there more to chemistry than you allow? The answer is out there.

"wauw, your saying cause and effect dosnt apply to your ice cube example, but that is only true if you imagine it, as there is no logic in fantasy", cause and effect doesn't apply to the ice cube example. There is no cause. There is no effect. There is only an observation. Ice cubes don't float in water because of the water and the water displacing isn't a side-effect of the ice cube. There are some things that do arise from processes and there are some things that just happen to be as they are.

For instance there is no process required for you to exist as you are per se. There is a process for the conception but the rest is actually irrespective of it; your gestational period disconnects from the conception, your birth disconnects from the gestational period, and your current self disconnects from your birth; while these are sequenced they are not actually linked intrinsically. This can be a bit complex at first so the simplest example is turning the page of a book. Though you turn the page of the book the words do not appear magically because you did. They were always there. You are not the cause of the words, though you are the cause of the page being turned, thus you are not the cause of the content, though you can only perceive the content if you turn the page, and in turn this means that the two elements, the previous page and the new page and their continuity, are not intrinsically linked by you despite your being required to turn the page.

It's fun stuff this "Logic".
Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

making sense and reasonable might be the same, but you used the words make sense, im talking about reason, reason is not physical, senses are

dude I am simplifying an example... im not making an absolute statement that I will die if I fall of a cliff, but based on the logic that applies to reality it would not be reasonable for me to jump of a cliff...

logic is cause and effect, not twisted observations... it is illogical to jump of a cliff because of matter, and its reasonable to conclude that based on the logic that still applies, I didn't gain the powers of superman over night by random coincidence so its still unreasonable for me to jump unless I want to die

now is a loop, there is no going into the future beyond what I can imagine. the future is ahead of my personal physical experience, and the future is false

it is only poisonous if it is poisonous to the body, therefore if its not poisonous to the body its not poisonous
blackkid

Con

"making sense and reasonable might be the same, but you used the words make sense, im talking about reason, reason is not physical, senses are", you're referring to your ability to reason but it's the same. You use all of the data you take in through your senses to create a standard or outlook; whether it's touching a hot stove to realize it's hot or listening to a lecture and having an epiphany both use the same standard reasoning ability.

"dude I am simplifying an example... im not making an absolute statement that I will die if I fall of a cliff, but based on the logic that applies to reality it would not be reasonable for me to jump of a cliff...", and I am making it more complex because your understanding of how things work is too simple. If the world were so black and white would I be here taunting you with the notion that it's not? Of course not.

"ogic is cause and effect, not twisted observations... it is illogical to jump of a cliff because of matter, and its reasonable to conclude that based on the logic that still applies, I didn't gain the powers of superman over night by random coincidence so its still unreasonable for me to jump unless I want to die", matter has nothing to do with it; the easiest test to any idea is to make it smaller. For instance you say jumping off of a cliff and don't give a height so let's say that this cliff is 2' tall. Will you die if you jump off of a 2' tall cliff? That's a pretty complicated question honestly. It's not a black or white yes or no, no different than you not necessarily dying from falling off of a cliff; the rules of the world and physics aren't so simple as to grant you the joys and comforts that come with deductive logic. I am sorry.

"now is a loop, there is no going into the future beyond what I can imagine. the future is ahead of my personal physical experience, and the future is false", there is no loop. You're trying far too hard to delve far too deep into the simplest of things. You could say that the future is beyond our grasp but honestly when you go to work tomorrow it's preplanned. Just being honest. The arguments of potential that come around this concept are fallacious wastes of time for a reason. Don't do that to yourself.

"it is only poisonous if it is poisonous to the body, therefore if its not poisonous to the body its not poisonous", but alcohol is always poisonous it just takes a specific amount to take on effect and become lethal or even have an impairing effect honestly. "It is what it is" only works when it's true all the time as a constant but nothing in this inductive universe is a constant. Again, I am sorry.
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

by complicating it you are simply lying to yourself. lies are complicated by separation and true is simple now as one

no you are not, you are being unreasonable if you argue its reasonable for me to jump of a cliff in my current state, im hinting at its a long way down.. obviously it would be unreasonable to jump, you wouldn't jump

I can only wake op physically today now, and tomorrow is still tomorrow, which is in my imagination today now

yes so alcohol is poisonous.. thanks for backing my point
blackkid

Con

"by complicating it you are simply lying to yourself. lies are complicated by separation and true is simple now as one", you should put that in a book or a blog or something. It will definitely make people pay attention to you.

"no you are not, you are being unreasonable if you argue its reasonable for me to jump of a cliff in my current state, im hinting at its a long way down.. obviously it would be unreasonable to jump, you wouldn't jump", hinting you say? Implying? So I was right all along. Oh those hidden parameters...

"I can only wake op physically today now, and tomorrow is still tomorrow, which is in my imagination today now", so when you typed this was it like ... deep? You know, flowing from one key to the next, unsure if you would make it between key presses? Instead of worrying about likelihood I bet you type like every letter is your last. You never know, you know, and your ability to manage to survive to type out one whole word is fictitious, because that's the future, and that's not real... Right? I got confused.

"yes so alcohol is poisonous.. thanks for backing my point", I am pretty sure you never had a point because this runs counter to just about everything actually said. However...

Congratulations! I hope you win! Vote for Pro! <3
Debate Round No. 5
44 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
answer me this, why don't you give your kid battery acid if you want it to be healthy?
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
the dictionary is wrong

it is that, you don't comprehend what im saying
Posted by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
Pro you need to work on making your points more clear and comprehending your opponent's arguments.

Actually cause and effect aren't synonyms of logic. Please look up the word in the dictionary.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
well if its unreasonable to jump.. I was only trying to make you see how its connected, the debate was about logic not reason. if the fall is 1 meter its reasonable to jump not unreasonable, that's why I said its implied but maybe I should have framed it differently, I just don't like complicating things. its unreasonable to jump of a cliff if the crash is sufficient to kill you.

if I said, its reasonable to jump of a cliff, then other parameters apply in my mind
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
"How tall is the cliff?", a parameter that you never actually stated. It's hidden and implied and hinted that it's high enough to kill you but how high is that? You are fun to play with but the game is over. We'll not keep going, you know. You'll live.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
there are no hidden parameters.. sry you cant recognize jumping off a cliff is unreasonable
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
hmm interesting points about poison.

if no one can get poisoned, no poison exist

the effect of the poison is the cause of the poison
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
no m8 look
cause+effect=logic
reason+intent=morality
logic+experience=reason(the concept of logic)
randomness+logic=chaos

=(is)
+(and)

one might say natural causation is chaos. a cause is either by choice or not
Posted by captmurk 2 years ago
captmurk
According to your own equations, you have defined 'Logic' in the following ways:

logic = cause + effect
logic = reason - intent
logic = reason - experience
logic = morality - intent - experience
logic = chaos + order
logic = chaos - randomness
logic = randomness + logic + order

So once again, what exactly is your position regarding logic?
Posted by Valkrin 2 years ago
Valkrin
This is too funny.
*grabs popcorn*
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
vi_spexblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never formed a coherent premise or argument to debate around. It seemed to be a stream of consciousness that would occure regardless of Con's rebuttals, or the topic... which was just as nebulous as pro's arguments.