Logic lesson 1

There is something in logic called, "the three quantifiers."

Definition of quantifier- "An expression, as “all” or “some,” that indicates the quantity of a proposition."
Definition of proposition- a statement to be proved, explained, or discussed.
The three quantifiers are:
All
Some
None

Those are three things that you can say about anything. Now of course there are other words that represent the same meaning, such as, "everything," "nothing," or "many," etc.

If someone doesn't specify, you are entitled to read it as "all." Example-"Muslims are terrorists." This proposition is saying "all Muslims are terrorists."
All you need to disprove a proposition with the quantifier "all," is one thing that contradicts it. Example- "All crows are blue." If I show you a solid black crow, I have disproved your proposition. If you say "no crows are blue," all I have to do is show you a crow that is blue. In the case that the proposition is "some," the next question to address is "which."

If it helps, another way to look at this is with the word "cases."
All cases
some cases(if so, which cases?)
No cases

Definition of case-"A set of circumstances or conditions."

All cases of Muslims are cases of terrorists.
All cases of Crows are cases of blue crows, etc.

If you can reduce things to all, some and none in your life; things get much much more simple.


Examples:
Carrots are orange-all
American citizens are never stupid-none
Most people are kind-some.

Start thinking and speaking in the all, some or none filter to be more precise with wording and observation.
Hope this helps!

It doesn't.

a reply to: schuyler

Okay. Why not?

originally posted by: Thetan
a reply to: schuyler

Okay. Why not?

Because it's straight from a Philosophy or Logic 101 textbook and completely simplistic. In fact, it's an insult to anyone who reads it. You are not in a position to lecture anyone else on the proper use of language.

That's why not.

a reply to: schuyler

I'm assuming you're saying that you already knew it. Very well then.

a reply to: Thetan

I think the problem is more hearing the pot tell kettle with no indication to how tarnished the source (the pot) is.

Don't underestimate how logical the common person is, or how much they understand.

Maybe try telling true stories on how using the logic in a certain way gave benefit to you personally, it helps.

a reply to: Thetan

It is helpful, thanks.

It's only insulting to those who take insult to it, which, according to logic, is not "anyone". Point proven.

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: Thetan
a reply to: schuyler

Okay. Why not?

Because it's straight from a Philosophy or Logic 101 textbook and completely simplistic. In fact, it's an insult to anyone who reads it. You are not in a position to lecture anyone else on the proper use of language.

That's why not.

This logic is pinpointed (targeted); not a grab bag all inclusive, did you miss this?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Thetan

It is helpful, thanks.
It's only insulting to those who take insult to it, which, according to logic, is not "anyone". Point proven.

Yes; and why would anyone consider this an insult, unless is a magnificent ego intelligence? For some of us slugs/amoebas gives us hope there is the chance to evolve.

originally posted by: Thetan
There is something in logic called, "the three quantifiers."

Examples:
Carrots are orange-all
American citizens are never stupid-none
Most people are kind-some.

Start thinking and speaking in the all, some or none filter to be more precise with wording and observation.

Orange rhymes with no thing.
Most American Citizens are immigrants from other lands (other than the Native American).
Stop filtering and speak plainly.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Why would anyone consider this an insult (to ones magnificent intelligence)?

No clue.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: vethumanbeing

vhb:Why would anyone consider this an insult (to ones magnificent intelligence)?

LesMisanthrope: No clue.

We should ask.

a reply to: Thetan

I'll bite, particularly because I feel slightly annoyed at people who misapply things they learned in their youth and believe that they are participating in a valid dialectic.

To be able to properly utilize that "all" qualifier it is implicit that you have 'all' knowledge; that there are no instances that contradict what you are stating. Since it is most likely that you do not have 'all' knowledge, you cannot (in most cases) use the "all" qualifier.

Similarly, the "none" qualifier is invalid because it too implies perfect knowledge.

So, it would initially appear that the "some" qualifier is the only acceptable one we can use... but what if the 'all' or 'none' qualifiers did apply (which we could never know), then the "some" qualifier becomes suspect too, because it also implies, arrogantly, that our knowledge is perfect.

Therefore, by reason, none of these qualifiers make a valid argument in all instances.

In the instance of the 'orange' carrot: Amarillo carrots are yellow, Lunar White carrots are white, Snow White carrots are white, Atomic Red carrots are red and Cosmic Purple carrots are purple.

There have been many non-stupid Americans.

Even unkind people can be kind.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Thetan
There is something in logic called, "the three quantifiers."

Examples:
Carrots are orange-all
American citizens are never stupid-none
Most people are kind-some.

Start thinking and speaking in the all, some or none filter to be more precise with wording and observation.

Orange rhymes with no thing.
Most American Citizens are immigrants from other lands (other than the Native American).
Stop filtering and speak plainly.

According to Google, Orange rhymes with Blorenge (a mountain in Wales) and sporange (a sac where spores are made).

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Thetan

chrOnaut: In the instance of the 'orange' carrot: Amarillo carrots are yellow, Lunar White carrots are white, Snow White carrots are white, Atomic Red carrots are red and Cosmic Purple carrots are purple.

There are also many specie of 'crow' (I think used as a metaphorical reference); only two actually the Amerian or the Northwester. Large, all black; tip of tail squared or slightly rounded. Loves granola and shiny objects; a smart bird that some believe to have 'Jay' characteristics.

chrOnaut: There have been many non-stupid Americans.
Even unkind people can be kind.

Thetan did not say that; in fact the opposite giving accolades to American ingenuity. How can unkind people be kind, doing so as a donors to a cause anonymous philanthropy?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Thetan
There is something in logic called, "the three quantifiers."

Examples:
Carrots are orange-all
American citizens are never stupid-none
Most people are kind-some.

Start thinking and speaking in the all, some or none filter to be more precise with wording and observation.

Orange rhymes with no thing.
Most American Citizens are immigrants from other lands (other than the Native American).
Stop filtering and speak plainly.

According to Google, Orange rhymes with Blorenge (a mountain in Wales) and sporange (a sac where spores are made).

Or-Ange/Blor-Enge. Sporange/Spor-Ange. You could be correct; need to hear it spoken phonetically from the inventor of these words, this all diabolical.

a reply to: chr0naut

I'll bite, particularly because I detest people who misapply things they learned in their youth and believe that they are participating in a valid dialectic.

To be able to properly utilize that "all" qualifier it is implicit that you have 'all' knowledge; that there are no instances that contradict what you are stating. Since it is most likely that you do not have 'all' knowledge, you cannot EVER use the "all" qualifier.

I think you mean quantifier?

We can possess all knowledge in a specific domain of discourse. All the change in my pockets are pennies.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Qualifier/Quantifier; so different when used to attempt to describe something exacting a specific meaning. Just got the words mixed up. Language is as tricky as is sneaky.

Lord, some of these comments reflect the exact reason i'm giving lessons in logic.

Although it shouldn't matter as long as the lesson is accurate, perhaps it would appease some people reading my lesson to know that i'm attending university right now as a philosophy major and am being formally trained in logic.

Why not be ultra clear and use mathematics: percentage of population, population and surveyed population, standard deviation and statistical significance.

The words 'all', 'some' and 'none' are dependent on the verb, even if it is the copula. In the past tense, 'all Christians were martyrs' can mean they were but aren't any longer, or they were all martyrs (completed), and we're not interested in the present. It is the listener that decides and that can lead to problems. Then there's the negative. 'Some Christians don't go to church'....does that mean 'most Christians go to church'? There could be an implied qualification: 'some do', 'some go to tabernacle', 'some go to a prayer house'...

'All the white men in America'..., 'All of the white men in America...''?

Then there are different languages. In Japanese you can't be specific with 'none', 'some' and 'all'. You have to use a verb modifier to put the verb into a vague, humbler state: 'probably'. If you use numbers the verb rule is lifted and a number qualifier applied which also creates a sense of approximation but which the listener doesn't rely on if the number is quite precise like 98.4.

Logic and language should not be allowed to mix.