Jump to content
Science Forums

The 'logic' And Certainty (And Perils) Of '2 + 2 = 4'


Recommended Posts

[i'm placing this in the Mathematics sub-forum as there is no section for "critical analysis."]

 

From kiddie-school math, we all learned equations and addition, such as "2 + 2 = 4".

 

In a debate forum of which I once was a member--I think it was a Facepalm group, actually--there was a guy there who fancied himself the arbiter of (expert in) the logical fallacies and he wielded the named fallacies as a sledgehammer. One of his habits was (past tense) stating a tenet or aspect of biological evolution and accusing anyone who disagreed with what he considered to be an obvious violation of the "simple logic" of "2 + 2 = 4." (I will reveal later the reason he stopped this bad habit.) The same accusation is often seen, but is conveyed with "2+2=5": someone is being accused of the equivalent of stating "2+2=5." I think we've all seen this and, I suspect, some in the peanut gallery have or do accuse others of such a "crime."

 

My degree is a B.A. in "Computer Mathematics"--an amalgamated major that my college offered before they had a proper Computer Science major. I took all the math required for a normal CompSci major (and programming, of course) plus a bunch that might be part of a Mathematics major.

 

When I saw this guy pummel, repeatedly, people with the accusation of violating kiddy-math in the context of the very controversial subject of biological evolution, for example--there were other subjects--I thought he ought to reconsider and expressed as much. (Asside: What made me think that he ought to reconsider were things I learned in my software courses not my mathematics courses.)

 

I approached the guy by starting a topic based on what he called "2+2 logic."

 

I'm going to do that here! Your challenges are to:

 

Use your "2 + 2" logic to evaluate the old, well-accepted expression: "You are what you eat."

 

And/Or (your choice)

 

Answer this question: Is 2+2=4 correct all the time?; The answer, "No", should, of course, be accompanied by your reason.

 

As usual, I will reveal the answer I have prepared after others take the challenge.

 

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

 

Due to the fact that some here are, still, spinning their wheels in the anal-retention phase of development, I will make explicit my "purposes" and "intent" by starting this thread.

 

1) To challenge the peanut gallery to use their critical analysis skills--this is a science forum--to evaluate the subject expression, though, for the record, I challenged that guy to use his "2+2 logic" to answer the challenge. You may use either or neither.

 

2) To reveal the dangers of thinking the putative "logic" conveyed by the kiddie-math expression "2+2=4" will serve you outside the classroom.

 

You should infer that 1) is the more fun purpose, while 2) will "separate the men from the boys" to use another old expression.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Please don't drag modulo math into this. If that happens, then I'll lock the thread myself....if I could.

... 

Abstract Algebra is wonderful because you can prove things about groups that you don’t even understand, :phones:

Buffy

.

The above proves that you cheated. That means you're dangerous to yourself, as well.

 

 

Diarrhea of the mouth and tips of the fingers, pardon the repetition. post-94394-0-37592300-1505804612.gif

Edited by scherado
Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the fact that some here are, still, spinning their wheels in the anal-retention phase of development,.....

 

1) To challenge the peanut gallery 

 

The unique combination of stupidity and arrogance results in a broadside insult to all members of the forum before anybody has decided whether the thread is worth bothering with. Having read the OP I don't think it is, and clearly I'm not alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FAI (For Anybody's Info.) My ignore list (serenity promotion) reads

 

exchemist

pogmpgamagoogaba-daba-doo

DrKrettin

 

--------------Edit to add-------

 

Well, of course 2 + 2 can equal 0, too.

...

Abstract Algebra is wonderful because ...

.

.

The above proves that you cheated. That means you're dangerous to yourself, as well.

...

.

To wit: There is no mention of--or allusion to--"Abstract Algebra" in this thread.

Edited by scherado
Link to post
Share on other sites

To wit: There is no mention of--or allusion to--"Abstract Algebra" in this thread.

You may not have noticed this, but every single one of my 8000+ posts here ends with a quote, marked with :phones: , known to regular members as "Buffy's Asterisk."

 

It's not part of the post itself, but is intended to make a comment or provide emphasis for the post itself, and it is often oblique. You can ignore it, but to call it something that invalidates the rest of the post is, well, a "mistake."

 

It should be noted though, that allusions are not always intentional, and as most people find in life, their unintentional allusions can have deleterious side-effects.

 

 

Preachers in pulpits talked about what a great message is in the book. No matter what you do, somebody always imputes meaning into your books, :phones:
Buffy
Link to post
Share on other sites

You may not have noticed this, but every single one of my 8000+ posts here ends with a quote, marked with :phones: , known to regular members as "Buffy's Asterisk."

 

It's not part of the post itself, but is intended to make a comment or provide emphasis for the post itself, and it is often oblique. You can ignore it, but to call it something that invalidates the rest of the post is, well, a "mistake."

 

It should be noted though, that allusions are not always intentional, and as most people find in life, their unintentional allusions can have deleterious side-effects.

 

 

Preachers in pulpits talked about what a great message is in the book. No matter what you do, somebody always imputes meaning into your books, :phones:

Buffy

.

Is it not obvious that I noticed? Further evidence that you are "dangerous"--this is a euphemism.

 

Do you deny my accusation? Do you comprehend my accusation? You may reverse the order of those two questions as needed.

 

"Here come the Devil prowl around; warm whiskey for every ghost" :beer-fresh:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it not obvious that I noticed? 

 

Do you deny my accusation? Do you comprehend my accusation? You may reverse the order of those two questions as needed.

 

Do you deny that if you noticed, that your accusation is moot? Do you comprehend your accusation? You may reverse the order of those two questions as needed.

 

 

Did you know that they are serving free beer in the village? :phones:

Buffy

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you deny that if you noticed, that your accusation is moot? [second half of sentence added back for clarity]

That is incomprehensible.

 

Well, if you only read the first half of the sentence it could indeed be termed incomprehensible. It's inarguable that I used normal indirect reference common in the English language that made it slightly harder to comprehend without context, so here's it is with the indirection removed:

 

Do you deny that if you noticed that I include quotes at the end of posts where those quotes do not directly involve the argument in said post, that your accusation that I was including "Abstract Algebra" as a key part of my argument is moot?

 

 

Can anyone translate that?

Sure, if you'd like:

 

Вы отрицаете, что если вы заметили, что я включает цитаты в конце должностей, где эти цитаты прямо не связаны с аргументом в указанном посту, то, что ваше обвинение в том, что я включал "абстрактную алгебру" в качестве ключевой части моего аргумента, является спорным?

 

 

Is that better?

 

 

When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less, :phones:

Alice

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you only read the first half of the sentence it could indeed be termed incomprehensible. It's inarguable that I used normal indirect reference common in the English language that made it slightly harder to comprehend without context, so here's it is with the indirection removed:

 

Do you deny that if you noticed that I include quotes at the end of posts where those quotes do not directly involve the argument in said post, that your accusation that I was including "Abstract Algebra" as a key part of my argument is moot?

 

 

 

Sure, if you'd like:

 

Вы отрицаете, что если вы заметили, что я включает цитаты в конце должностей, где эти цитаты прямо не связаны с аргументом в указанном посту, то, что ваше обвинение в том, что я включал "абстрактную алгебру" в качестве ключевой части моего аргумента, является спорным?

 

 

Is that better?

...

.

Are you aware that the administrator "sanctus" informed me that it is not a violation of guidelines or rules of the forum to put an administrator (or moderator) on one's ignore list? That this is very unusual is not my concern. I need to know whether "sanctus" is correct?

 

Do you understand the question?

 

Do I need to provide a link?

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Are you aware that the administrator "sanctus" informed me that it is not a violation of guidelines or rules of the forum to put an administrator (or moderator) on one's ignore list? That this is very unusual is not my concern. I need to know whether "sanctus" is correct?

Yes, although since you've used the term so loosely, he meant that figuratively. You're welcome to ignore what we say in the context of general discussion, but as the Forum Rules indicate, if a member of the staff makes a formal moderation request for a response, you're required to do so.

 

As a result of the need to moderate and have the targets of that moderation hear the requests, the software does not allow you to put anyone on the staff to your "Ignore Preferences."

 

It appears you're likely to ignore that.

 

Who knows what it is you're asking for, but go ahead and try to describe it for us.

 

 

Oh the thinks you can think up if only you try, :phones:

Buffy

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Are you aware that the administrator "sanctus" informed me that it is not a violation of guidelines or rules of the forum to put an administrator (or moderator) on one's ignore list? That this is very unusual is not my concern. I need to know whether "sanctus" is correct?

 

Do you understand the question?

 

Do I need to provide a link?

Who cares? You can read, or not read, anything on a forum. The only risk you run is that by ignoring a moderator you might end up getting banned, due to not responding to moderation guidance. This is not something most of us will  lose sleep over, either way.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...