Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Modal logic? Good or bad

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 1:43:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: I have many doubts about the power of Modal Logic. Many philospohers do?

What is good about it?

What is bad about it?

What are its vantage points and limitations?

what you think about it? why?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 1:46:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: Power as how many situations can it validly apply too? The more the more powerfull a logic, is?(all logic, should be of the same logic. that is a problem)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
DanteAlighieri
Posts: 42
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 2:37:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Extremely useful in computer science and various mathematical fields. Largely overrated and misused in philosophy, especially philosophy of religion.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 2:44:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Is there a gay option?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 4:07:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 2:44:38 AM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a gay option?

The Fool: If you can explain what is Gay about Modal logic. I mean one bold assertion is as good as the next. (Hegel)

If its not on Modal Logic I think there is a forum in one of the Higher categories which is about the Gay Community of DDO. You may have more luck there.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 4:50:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 2:37:49 AM, DanteAlighieri wrote:
Extremely useful in computer science and various mathematical fields. Largely overrated and misused in philosophy, especially philosophy of religion.

Yeah you are Right. But becarefull in that Modal Logic is of philosophy. The First problem it seem you have to prove that other world exist thus to apply it in that other worldly sense.

Lets alone at as any sort of proof.
Which is kind of impossible for even to hypothesis about worlds beg the question that there are other worlds.

First because wouldn't that just not be of the same world.
I think it only makes sense in terms of probability and epistemological worlds at best.

But even these notion can be expression with a (modernized) classical logical systems
where the world can be expressed as situations in terms of sets suffient conditions.

As in its either ((A or B) or C) where A,B,C are the possible situations(worlds), based from the best of our knowledge. Of course together making a joint necessary condition for something to being True(corresponding truth) no Modal Logic needed.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 4:07:33 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/22/2012 2:44:38 AM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a gay option?

The Fool: If you can explain what is Gay about Modal logic. I mean one bold assertion is as good as the next. (Hegel)

If its not on Modal Logic I think there is a forum in one of the Higher categories which is about the Gay Community of DDO. You may have more luck there.

It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 5:32:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 4:07:33 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/22/2012 2:44:38 AM, socialpinko wrote:
Is there a gay option?

The Fool: If you can explain what is Gay about Modal logic. I mean one bold assertion is as good as the next. (Hegel)

If its not on Modal Logic I think there is a forum in one of the Higher categories which is about the Gay Community of DDO. You may have more luck there.

It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

The Fool: As in making it better for them or worse? The most important property of logic is that there is not inherent bias. As in 1+1=2 has no self biases we all understand it, that what makes it objective. I don't know one logical principle that is not already in a math equation. For example like I was saying modal logic is just another langauge for probability in math.
The big mistake in trying to use Logic to proof math is that they are completely overlaping. They are really of one in the same.

But I would like to know how its Good or bad for them? Most professional Apologist would say logic is a product of God. But then also say they can proof God with it alone?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 6:01:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:46:08 AM, drafterman wrote:
In some possible worlds, it's good. In others, it's bad.

The Fool: Lol. what was actually pretty funny, in some possible worlds.

(honestly it was funny)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 6:25:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

The Very problem of Theologist is that philosohpy or logic is a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. In that sense they really can't be trusted. Even if they are not doing it on purpose, thier foundation of understanding the world rest on it. Which means they are forced to make the world fit with this presupposition.

I never even heard of the notion untill I came onto DDO. In Canada philosphers stay in world A and Theology, Religion even philosophy of Religion stays in world B. All the arguments I have heard have already been refuted in philosophy a long time ago. Here faith and reason are not mixed.(that is iits not the Fundemtalist type like in the US) Religious people do there thing, but its not asserted so much as a Fact. The idea is that you can't prove it right or wrong. So then niether can you push it on anyone else.
It may get pushed in smaller isolated towns, where the education is not the best,and everybody goes to the same church and knows each other. You will get social neglect and punishment is you not on there team.

The larger cities are too multicultural, and religiously diverse which prevents the Dominiation of one religion in particluar, gaining any special authority. In fact we because of this mixer reliious believe is dropping here faster then any part in the world. This mixter creates doubt on your Religion of God being the TRUE ONE.
Seconly it gets harder and harder to believe that all your Friends and neighbors you like are going to hell for having different opinions.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 9:08:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

even if that were true (which it isn't - most problems with the arguments have nothing to do with the use of modal logic per se), i'm not sure how that more specifuc to theistic apologists than it is to metaphyscians in general.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
SarcasticIndeed
Posts: 2,215
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 10:10:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 6:01:17 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:46:08 AM, drafterman wrote:
In some possible worlds, it's good. In others, it's bad.

The Fool: Lol. what was actually pretty funny, in some possible worlds.



(honestly it was funny)

Yeah, I laughed as well.
<SIGNATURE CENSORED> nac
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 10:26:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 9:08:59 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

even if that were true (which it isn't - most problems with the arguments have nothing to do with the use of modal logic per se), i'm not sure how that more specifuc to theistic apologists than it is to metaphyscians in general.

The Fool: I am sorry popculturepooka but you never seem to back up your claims. At all, its makes no sense to tell someone its a metaphysical thing if they they are not familiar With ti. . Metaphysics to Theologins, or Religious philsopher, is extremly different. Did you read what people had to say about why Modal Logic is limited. Can you refute these claims or not? Nothing else is relavant untill you can refute them.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2012 10:29:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 10:10:24 AM, SarcasticIndeed wrote:
At 6/22/2012 6:01:17 AM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:46:08 AM, drafterman wrote:
In some possible worlds, it's good. In others, it's bad.

Edit.
The Fool: Lol. That was actually pretty funny, in some possible worlds.



(honestly it was funny)

Yeah, I laughed as well.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
KeytarHero
Posts: 612
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:35:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

Actually, no. The ontological argument argues from modal logic. When properly understood, it is irrefutable. Philosophy and logic have always been a friend to Theists.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:40:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 3:35:02 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

Actually, no. The ontological argument argues from modal logic. When properly understood, it is irrefutable. Philosophy and logic have always been a friend to Theists.

The Fool: come on man, Theist have there own wierd logic. They are a just abusing the term. THey are hurting us.! Its immoral.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:47:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 3:40:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:35:02 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

Actually, no. The ontological argument argues from modal logic. When properly understood, it is irrefutable. Philosophy and logic have always been a friend to Theists.

The Fool: come on man, Theist have there own wierd logic. They are a just abusing the term. THey are hurting us.! Its immoral.

I don't see how necessary concepts fit in a non-theistic view.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 3:55:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 3:47:43 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:40:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:35:02 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

Actually, no. The ontological argument argues from modal logic. When properly understood, it is irrefutable. Philosophy and logic have always been a friend to Theists.

The Fool: come on man, Theist have there own wierd logic. They are a just abusing the term. THey are hurting us.! Its immoral.

I don't see how necessary concepts fit in a non-theistic view.

The Fool: would you accept the challenge on that.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Reason_Alliance
Posts: 1,283
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/30/2012 5:36:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/30/2012 3:55:31 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:47:43 PM, Reason_Alliance wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:40:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 6/30/2012 3:35:02 PM, KeytarHero wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:57:44 AM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:32:57 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/22/2012 5:17:16 AM, socialpinko wrote:
It's gay because it likes fvcking theistic apologists in the arse.

?

Theistic apologists use modal logic to justify various arguments for the existence of God. But their use is open to so many legitimate reductios that it ends up buttfucking them more then helping their case.

Actually, no. The ontological argument argues from modal logic. When properly understood, it is irrefutable. Philosophy and logic have always been a friend to Theists.

The Fool: come on man, Theist have there own wierd logic. They are a just abusing the term. THey are hurting us.! Its immoral.

I don't see how necessary concepts fit in a non-theistic view.

The Fool: would you accept the challenge on that.

Haven't you been challenging me for weeks on that lol
Nome
Posts: 40
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/3/2012 5:54:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
All logic is evil, according the map. It is, therefore, our existential choice that we must establish it in all beings, being not or being is.