Please make a logic test

[Zetta_x]

The title explains itself. In the past few days I have seen abundance amounts of users with just horrible logic. It has gotten to the point where they have trolled my online experience at GBAtemp and I have compulsions to correct these users with an angered passion. A common trait I have seen in these posters, with probability near .8, are of age 13-16. Just so we are all on track, this is logic:

"A common trait I have seen in these illogical posters, with probability near .8, are of age 13-16"

I can bet, with probability of near .9, someone who is between the age 13-16 will read that statement and say, "I am pretty smart, I absolutely know logic, you can't generalize all 13-16 year olds." Here is why you fail, you don't know logic. If you are between the ages 13-16 and take offense of that above statement, you are affirming the consequent (I guess we can use some logical equivalences to turn it into negation of the antecedent but meh). I said a modus ponens statement with, if you are an illogical poster, then with probability near .8 are of the age 13-16. I didn't make any inferences on people between ages 13-16, I made an inference on illogical posters. That's why affirming the consequent is bad logic.

That's why, when I make a suggestion, I'm not going to direct it at people of ages 13-16, I'm going to direct it at illogical posters. Hence, the title explains it all, we need to have a logic test before people can't start posting. I'm am going to blow a headgasket if more no logic posters happen to appear on these forums.

Make it a simple test for all I care, make it so that you need at least .5 of the problems right, because, natural selection is not doing it's job.

 

[Wizerzak]

fascinating...

if A, then B. it is A, so B will occur. -> that is logic.
if A, then B. it is B, so A has occurred. -> that isn't logic, because it is impossible to know whether A has occurred to make B happen.

let me explain this with an example:

if a terrorist crashes an airplane into a building (A), the building will fall down (B). -> makes perfect sense.
a building has fallen down (A), therefore a terrorist must have crashed an airplane into it (A). -> i sincerely hope you see this makes no sense whatsoever.

if you still don't get it, you're stupid.

Thanks Hi Everyone for explaining what I was trying to show. I was being overwhelmed by everyone taking my statements wrong.

But why post it in the first place? All you are going to achieve is aggravating people.

 

[Zetta_x]

I am proving a point and the fact that I posted this in suggestion forums would hint why I am posting this.

Like I said, natural selection is not working fast enough on the GBAtemp forums and any of the long timers can show how the members of the community are going down hill. I swear, this is rooted to the amount of illogical posters.

 

[DigitalDeviant]

and what would be the point of a logic test? We can't ban people based on failing common sense...

 

[Nujui]

But there is no point to make one. Stupid people can still pass it and be stupid on here.

You just have to deal with it.

 

[Hi everyone]

and what would be the point of a logic test? We can't ban people based on failing common sense...

why not? if they fail something as basic as common sense, why should they be allowed to spout nonsense all over the place?

 

[DigitalDeviant]

and what would be the point of a logic test? We can't ban people based on failing common sense...

why not? if they fail something as basic as common sense, why should they be allowed to spout nonsense all over the place?

this is not a dicatorship, its the internet, if its not trolling or offensive and repetitive, people deserve a chance to give their point of view and/or change their ways.

 

[The Pi]

I completely understand your first post, I never said that I thought you said I was an illogical poster however, in the manner you worded the first post it is clear that you ARE ageist.

Please answer this as you failed to do so before "It is quite obvious you regard yourself as a very intellgent person and there is nothing wrong with that I also think the same about myself, however, you also seem to think you are better than everyone else due to this high intelligence and also your age. Please explain why you think this."

 

[Uncle FEFL]

It was much better here before all you narcissistic douchebags started posting topics like these.

I said a modus ponens statement with, if you are an illogical poster, then with probability near .8 are of the age 13-16. I didn't make any inferences on people between ages 13-16, I made an inference on illogical posters. That's why affirming the consequent is bad logic.

First of all, I'd like to know where you pulled that bullshit "statistic" from.
Second, just because "If A occurs, then B is an effect," is a logical premise does not mean its use is always logical. For example, your post is a complete non sequitur.

U lrn logic, bro

 

[s4mid4re]

fascinating...

if A, then B. it is A, so B will occur. -> that is logic.
if A, then B. it is B, so A has occurred. -> that isn't logic, because it is impossible to know whether A has occurred to make B happen.

let me explain this with an example:

if a terrorist crashes an airplane into a building (A), the building will fall down (B). -> makes perfect sense.
a building has fallen down (B), therefore a terrorist must have crashed an airplane into it (A). -> i sincerely hope you see this makes no sense whatsoever.

if you still don't get it, you're stupid.

A --> B doesn't make sense for me; a building isn't going to necessarily (100%) fall, even if a terrorist crashes an airplane into that building. from what I see, your A --> B logic states that the building will 100% fall, if a terrorist crashes an airplane.

well, but this is my opinion... or am I missing something here?

 

[Terminator02]

this thread makes me want to hurl

 

[DigitalDeviant]

maybe he wants the thread to grow, well its working.

on a related note the best one can do is try to reason with people, if they choose ignorance let them be.

 

[Ikki]

If you were so good with common sense you wouldn't have taken the time to make this thread since it won't achieve anything.

 

[Uncle FEFL]

if A, then B. it is B, so A has occurred. -> that isn't logic, because it is impossible to know whether A has occurred to make B happen.

So, the Big Bang theory and theories like it are illogical in all ways?

 

[DigitalDeviant]

If you were so good with common sense you wouldn't have taken the time to make this thread since it won't achieve anything.

I understand if this was a rant thread but nothing will come of this.

 

[Hi everyone]

A --> B doesn't make sense for me; a building isn't going to necessarily (100%) fall, even if a terrorist crashes an airplane into that building. from what I see, your A --> B logic states that the building will 100% fall, if a terrorist crashes an airplane.

well, but this is my opinion... or am I missing something here?[mthr] dude, i can't even tell if you're trolling or not, your post is just that stupid.

QUOTE(Uncle FEFL @ May 22 2011, 09:24 PM) So, the Big Bang theory and theories like it are illogical in all ways?

a theory remains a theory until it is proven that it cannot be proven wrong, which is impossible. the big bang theory is just a theory. it may very well be correct, but it will always remain a mystery. don't get me wrong, i'm not a [religious guy], i'm just pointing out the flaws in your thinking.

 

[Wizerzak]

If you were so good with common sense you wouldn't have taken the time to make this thread since it won't achieve anything.

My point precisely.

 

[stinkoman]

I sort of agree, assuming by logic you mean not being a fucking idiot who sees one thing and assumes another extreme. IE the people who believe that practically anything on the DS means N64/GBA emulators are possible.

 

[SifJar]

You are looking at it wrong SifJar.

*snip*

---

Like I said before, I had nearly full respect for you because you were one of the few who were intelligent. I realize there was slight ambiguity in my sentence on what exactly I was doing. But if you are still going to claim that is not logic, please specify why not so I can either rectify my statement or attempt to continue this argument.

Most of what I removed went way over my head. I think I sorta understand, but I still don't think your original statement was "logical" I believe it was, as someone else suggested, an observation. For something to be logical, it has to be the natural thing that is to be perfectly expected. From experience many of us know that a lot of trolls are young teens (not that a lot of young teens are trolls, of course), but I feel that experience takes the matter outside of pure logic. And I also feel that a lack of logic doesn't prevent a person from making a valuable contribution to a discussion or forum.

As for the statement: "I had nearly full respect for you because you were one of the few who were intelligent." - Am I to assume from the past tense used that you no longer think this way of me? (Seems the logical conclusion...

) If so, I would firstly like to state, with all due respect, that I'm not all that bothered how anyone views my level of intelligence. I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm not too bothered about people's opinions of me. I am the person that I am, no changing that

Secondly, I would like to suggest it is rather illogical to think of someone as less intelligent simply because they disagree with you.

It is clear to me that you know a lot about theoretical logic (I dunno if you've studied this at some point), but I think you may be applying it incorrectly in this context. Thanks to "hi everyone" I understand vaguely what you mean, but I don't think logic is the issue here. I think its mainly common sense and maturity that are lacking in many of these individuals, as well as basic reading and writing skills.

QUOTE(Hi everyone @ May 22 2011, 12:36 PM) if A, then B. it is B, so A has occurred. -> that isn't logic, because it is impossible to know whether A has occurred to make B happen.

So, the Big Bang theory and theories like it are illogical in all ways?

IMO, yes they are rather illogical. I don't think we can make assumptions about the origins of the universe simply because it exists. That proves nothing, not even that it had a beginning.

EDIT: Please note that I DO believe there was a beginning, but that doesn't mean it is necessarily logical.

 

[s4mid4re]

A --> B doesn't make sense for me; a building isn't going to necessarily (100%) fall, even if a terrorist crashes an airplane into that building. from what I see, your A --> B logic states that the building will 100% fall, if a terrorist crashes an airplane.

well, but this is my opinion... or am I missing something here?fuck dude, i can't even tell if you're trolling or not, your post is just that stupid.

I'm telling you that your explanation (quoted below) is bs because it doesn't make perfect sense to me.

QUOTE(Hi everyone @ May 22 2011, 03:36 PM)

let me explain this with an example:

if a terrorist crashes an airplane into a building (A), the building will fall down (B). -> makes perfect sense.

A plane crashing into a building will not 100% make the building fall down, thus it cannot be used to explain logic (to me, at least). I want you to explain and prove how a plane crashing into a building WILL 100% make that building fall down. Then, I will be content and stop asking stupid questions.

Spoiler

yes I AM messing with you

 

[Issac]

Holy shit, this is a really useless thread.
Yeah, you're writing a statement with the form of "logic". And a few people haven't learned that yet... So?
From my point of view, you try your hardest to use fancy words and use high level English just to prove to someone that you are so much smarter than everyone here.
Well, to me you just look like an ass. Sure I understand what you say, and in the same way i've come up with a statement that "If someone disagrees with me, doesn't listen and just keep shouting what they think without taking anyones oppinions into consideration; they most often are communists".
Here, I'm not saying all communists are impossible to argue with, but that most people that I have a hard time arguing with happen to be communists.

Still, what does this topic gain? A test to kick out those who haven't learned logic yet? Wow...

Also, you "have been a well accomplished math tutor"... at the age of 21? I find that hard to believe. Maybe you have helped your mates out, maybe taught a couple of kids some basic math... but well accomplished math tutor? Yeah right.