Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: Re: Pi, please judge me

Expand Messages
  • Robert Baty
    ... From: Robert Baty Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2008 5:02 PM To: coCBanned@yahoogroups.com Subject: [coCBanned] Re: Pi, please judge me DBWillis, You still
    Message 1 of 4 , Nov 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Robert Baty
      Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2008 5:02 PM
      To: coCBanned@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [coCBanned] Re: Pi, please judge me

      DBWillis,

      You still haven't dealt with your "Wikipedia" problem.

      I'm guessing I didn't miss anything regarding your failure to openly, honestly deal with that.

      It wasn't just about accepting the logical validity of my "Goliath of GRAS". And no thanks are required where I have to force you into doing the simple, right things.

      For instance, you haven't yet posted your vote in the VALIDITY poll on Focus_on_Truth.

      Here's your "Wikipedia" reference again to refresh your memory, DBWillis:

      > On wikipedia,
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism

      > ... I found a listing of all the VALID
      > forms of syllogism.

      > There are 19.

      > Which one of those 19 valid forms
      > is the form of your GRAS argument,
      > Robert?

      > Do you see that form anywhere in
      > the list of 19?

      > I think I know the form you
      > SHOULD have tried to use, but
      > your structure has to be reworked
      > to make it fit.

      > I just wonder if you will recognize
      > which one is the right one...

      > And of course if either your major
      > or minor premises are wrong, then
      > your conclusion is wrong.

      Am I going to have to hold your hand and lead you, DBWillis, step by step through the above and see if you are going to be open and honest in dealing with your problems related thereto?

      Let it go? That seems to be your answer answer to all your problems, DBWillis, but it doesn't work except to further demonstrate you preference for running!

      Let me know if you want me to help lead you, step by step, through your above claims, DBWillis. We can work through it if you are up to it, and it is you who needs to be thanking me for all the hours of time and trouble I've taken to be able to help you on these fundamental matters.

      You might also see if you can get Terry W. Benton to post his vote in the Focus_on_Truth VALIDITY poll and find out if he is now ready to explain how he came to make his erroneous "Dumbo modus ponens" claim!

      Sincerely,
      Robert Baty


      ----------DBWillis Message------------

      To: coCBanned@yahoogroups.com
      From: DBWILLIS@...
      Subject: [coCBanned] Re: Pi, please judge me
      Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008 4:05 PM

      DW here,

      RB>>Did I miss where DBWillis actually dealt with his "Wikipedia" problem;
      admitting his error, explaining his error, and correcting his error?>>

      Yes I think you missed it.

      I admitted that I was wrong to suggest that "GG" was not valid.

      I agreed that the format you used (which I did not recognize as one of those on Wiki) was fine.

      I did not actually SAY your format was
      not one of those 19 valid forms on Wiki, but I raised the question and asked
      you to point out which one it was...and you didn't.

      Later, I looked closer (after you ID'd it as a ______ type of argument, I forgot its name)...and then agreed it was a very simple "IF A then B....A is true...Therefore B".

      I still don't know which of the 19 valid ones at Wiki it is, but probably we could
      find one to make it fit.

      I am not disputing the validity of the form.

      I mistook "valid" for "leads to a true conclusion", and in that respect I was
      wrong.

      Now let it go, man!

      That format does NOTHING to prove what you want it to prove because the premise IS UNTRUE.

      Oh, I also "missed" your gracious expression of appreciation that I admitted
      I was wrong and admitted you had a valid form to your argument.

      Where can I find that?

      DW

      --------------------------------
      --------------------------------



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.