Into the Night
Verified User
You can't blame Sybil's socks on me, Hugo.What about it? Are you another troll name for Into Night?
You can't blame Sybil's socks on me, Hugo.What about it? Are you another troll name for Into Night?
I will be requesting you banned from all of my threads.



I'm not a troll account, Hugo. You can't blame me for your problem.You violate rule 14 every day. Be gone.
Lie. You have no idea what logic is. Redefinition fallacy. Void reference fallacy. Denial of logic.I know what logic is. I explained it. Very standard definition.
Logic requires no data. It it is not information. It requires no fact. It is not inference.Not true. Inference is used when there are gaps in the available data or information. The primary means by which logic is applied is through facts and hard data. Without some basis in fact and data, inferences cannot be made. On the other hand, with facts and data at hand, inferences are not always necessary.
Redefinition fallacy. Denial of logic.No. Logic is about the relation between statements. It is not about whether a statement is true or false.
No, Hugo. It is a decision. It also presupposes you have a raincoat to wear.It is raining. I better wear a rain coat is an inference.
Are you another troll name for mad mulligan?What about it? Are you another troll name for Into Night?
Non-sequitur fallacy. ?A->B is an invalid equation, Hugo.If 'A' is true, then 'B' is true. Basic logical form of inference.
No 'inference'. Buzzword fallacy. You made an INVALID statement. Non-sequitur fallacy.Notice, correct inferences can be made from a false statement.
No.Are you another troll name for mad mulligan?
Logic does not require a fact or data.It's basis however is in the facts and data presented. Without those, the statements themselves are meaningless.
This part is more accurate. Logic is not involved here. It is simply a decision whether to wear a raincoat.No, it isn't. You simply left out the intermediate steps getting to that conclusion.
It is raining.
I don't want to be rained on.
My choices to keep that from happening are a raincoat, umbrella, etc.
I have a raincoat but lack an umbrella.
I should wear a raincoat.
This is philosophy, not logic. However, it also conforms to the requirements of logic, even though it invented a concept (atomos).Inference is something like Democritus, a Greek philosopher, postulating that because you can divide things into smaller parts of the whole there must be something smaller than can be seen allowing that and called that thing atomos. He couldn't observe but only infer that atomos existed.
Nope. Logic is defined by axioms, just like mathematics. Inference is not required.Inference is the basis of logic.
waiting for you to be bannedNope. Logic is defined by axioms, just like mathematics. Inference is not required.
?A->?? is an invalid statement, Hugo. Incomplete argument.Logic is basically saying, if this statement is true, what else is true because of it.
You can't blame your socks on anybody else, Sybil.Are you another troll name for mad mulligan?
For what, Hugo?waiting for you to be banned
What language do you think that was, Son?Try English. It works better.
Those are the rules. But they are useless without data and information to run the equations, just like in mathematics.Logic requires no data. It it is not information. It requires no fact. It is not inference.
Like mathematics, logic is defined by a set of axioms. It is a closed functional system, just like mathematics.
Logic is about how we combine statements. Not about their individual truths.Those are the rules. But they are useless without data and information to run the equations, just like in mathematics.