[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 56 KB, 971x600, aj-logic-01sz-modal.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241054 No.4241054[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>If you present a true proposition, I will give you 10$. If you present a false proposition, you will give me 100$ or I will give you 500$ (I choose which), but I will not give you 10$.

Which proposition will you pick?

Post your proposition and (preferably) your reasoning behind it. I'll post the "correct one" if no one gets it right.

>> No.4241060

I don't get it, what's the catch? Anyone would give a false proposition.

>> No.4241063

>>4241060
You need to think of a (proper) proposition based on the greentext

>> No.4241069

OP is a gaffot

>> No.4241072

>>4241069 see >>4241063
Plus, you couldn't even verify my "gaffotness"

>> No.4241075

>>4241054
What's your address?

>> No.4241080

You will give me $10.

>> No.4241083

So I can either give you a true proposition, and therefore get 10$ guaranteed, or give a false one and you pick if I pay you or you pay me?

Surely, unless you're a mad millionaire, if you could pick you'd make me pay you.

>> No.4241086

>I will pay you 100$.

Then you'll have to pay me 500$.

>> No.4241089

>>4241054
"I will give you 100 dollars because I presented a false proposition, and you will not give me 10 dollars."

This cannot be true, because you would give me 10 dollars.
It must be false. If it's false, I won't give you 100 dollars.
So you have to give me 500 dollars.

>> No.4241095

>>4241089
based

OP better deliver on that 500

>> No.4241097

>>4241086
>>4241089

haha beat you!

>> No.4241104

*mugs OP*

proposition THIS *grabs dick*

>> No.4241105

>>4241054
"You won't give me 10$, nor 500$"

>> No.4241109

>>4241105

... so you just made yourself pay 100$? lol?

>> No.4241110

>>4241109
>that retard

>> No.4241140

I present the false proposition that I will give you $100.

The prop is necessarily false, and to remain so, you must choose to give me $500.

>> No.4241170

SO bored by the inactivity.

>> No.4241174

>>4241054
"You will give me $10 or you will not give me $10."

Tautology.

>> No.4241186

>>4241174
No. You simply restated the premise.

>> No.4241196
File: 1.80 MB, 320x240, gibus snipers.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241196

>>4241186
>it's not a tautology, it's actually tautology

>> No.4241201

so homework
much give me necessary truth
wow
so lit
2deep

>> No.4241210

>>4241196
You're not supposed to summarize the premise w/ a true proposition. It's a logical riddle. But you just go right ahead and keep posting gifs to assert how much you understand about the world.

>> No.4241221
File: 1.18 MB, 291x260, reaction nigga.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241221

>>4241210
>oh no I didn't understand something! quick, I must pretend I actually did, make up excuses and include some nifty, unnecessary ad hominem. heh... works every time.

>> No.4241230

>>4241210
>>4241221
I think he's "troilngfv ytrouuogeouf

>> No.4241232

>>4241221
Kid, you're answer is wrong. Also, really enjoy how you're insulting me w/ the exact mindset you must have experienced upon reading my last reply. Very logical of you.

>> No.4241265
File: 491 KB, 500x290, 1356142925004.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241265

>>4241232
>kid
>you're
>implying i'm the same guy that posted the tautology

>> No.4241311

>>4241265
You are a kid. This is obvious from your mode of expression. Also the fact you think yourself clever for pointing out a typo--congrats, btw. And you're clearly the same kid who posted the tautology because no one in their right mind would take an interest in defending something as incorrect and banal as that besides the op of that stupidity. Not only did you choose to defend it, but you demonstrated an emotional attachment to it, implying that it belonged to you, of course. Now let's just get to the point you're missing. OP posts If A then B, If not A then C or D, but not B. And you think the answer is: Either B or not B. I suppose you're not logical enough to understand that telling everyone what they already know isn't of the merit commensurate with posting a logical challenge in the first place, and thus cannot be the answer.
And btw, if you're not a kid, like let's say, older than 23, and you think it's clever to post gif animations, then I suggest you reevaluate your position in life.

>> No.4241329
File: 26 KB, 750x627, 1287359274819.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241329

>>4241311
>congrats, btw
Thanks!

>> No.4241376

>>4241105 got it right. Yay!

Here's why: If the proposition above (henceforth "P") is true, what it says must be the case. Meaning, I will not give you 10$ and I will not give you 500$. But for a true proposition, I have to give you 10$. This is a contradiction, so P must be false. Since P is false, what is says is not the case. That is, I will give you 10$ or 500$. But I cannot give you 10$ for a false proposition, so I must give you 500$.

>> No.4241397

>>4241376
No, this one >>4241086 >>4241089 is right

>> No.4241412

>>4241376
but the fact that it is false doesn't mean that all its parts are false. one of its parts being false is sufficient for it to be so.
the "you won't gime me 10$" is necessarily false; the "nor 500$" is possibly false but not necessarily. so you can still get paid a 100 instead of paying 500

>> No.4241417

how's this for a proposition
*grabs dick*

>> No.4241419

>>4241412
Did you happen to get fooled by the pic I posted? It has nothing to do with Modal Logic.

>> No.4241420

>>4241419
I didn't read the pic you posted

>> No.4241426

>>4241420
Still, it has nothing to do with Modal Logic.

>> No.4241430

>>4241054
Just because something exists in every possible world does not mean it is necessary. This is the same false argument that the greeks used to confirm there must be a god since every tribe, culture and society they ever encountered(and that we have encountered since then) believed in gods.

>> No.4241432

>>4241376
why is this >>4241086 not the right answer? it seems to work. you only pay 100$ for false propositions so it can't be true. since it false you don't pay 100$ so you're payed 500$

>> No.4241433

>>4241426
>Still, it has nothing to do with Modal Logic.
still talking about your pic? ok, I still hold my previous argument

>> No.4241449

>>4241432
It works.

>> No.4241454

>>4241449
well that's what I'm saying. why is >>4241376 correct when it has obvious trouble, and why is OP not acknowledging >>4241086 when it works perfectly

>> No.4241467

>>4241454
>Predict what is yet to come in the next book in the Ice and Fire Saga
>9 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click here to view.
>>>
>Anonymous 11/04/13(Mon)17:58 No.4241439
>Replies: >>4241444
> He should've just written it as a TV show in the first place. It's not like he didn't have the experience. Makes better viewing than reading material.
>>>
>Anonymous 11/04/13(Mon)18:00 No.4241444
>Replies: >>4241446
> >>4241439
Both are correct. They just tackle different sides of the same contextual equation. Op's choice dealt w/ $10 and $500, urs dealt w/ $100. W/in the parameters of the premise, either prop leads to the same conclusion, however, I'm pretty sure OP's choice was not posted as a logical response but rather a pessimistic gaff that this scenario sets up a participant to lose, not that that's relevant to the validity of either answer.

>> No.4241470

Sorry for all the green text, not sure how that got there.

>> No.4241473

>>4241467
>Both are correct
that's what I'm saying. OP's doesn't seem correct. the other one does. by the way, the other one is not mine

>> No.4241479

>>4241473
What? I'm saying the one OP chose is correct, as well the one dealing solely w/ $100. If you're referring to any other answer, then I'm not sure as to its validity.

>> No.4241489

>>4241479
ok:
I say this >>4241376 is wrong because of >>4241412
I say this >>4241086 is completely correct

>> No.4241486
File: 235 KB, 200x261, 1320827132007.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4241486

I have no fucking clue what's going on in this thread.

>> No.4241539

>>4241412
>is wrong because of >>4241412
If it's contradictory, the other parts don't matter anymore.

>> No.4241559

>>4241539
You're taking it as an if, then statement, I think. It was presented, however, as a conjunction. Within the structure of the AND statement of this conjunction, the parts don't reply upon one another so much as function simultaneously. Since his false statement is he wont get 10 and he wont get 500, he has to get 500 in order for the falsity to be maintained.

>> No.4241570

>>4241559
If he were to pay $100 for that false statement by OP's choice, then he wouldn't get $500 and he wouldn't get 10, which would make his statement true, meaning he would have to be paid 10, which is impossible.

>> No.4241577

>>4241430
>being this unintelligent

>> No.4241642

>>4241311
I'm the OP of the tautology. Not really sure what the hell you guys went on about, but you didn't specify the nature of the proposition you were looking for. In other words, any true proposition nets you 10 bucks. OP did not say, "which proposition gets me 500 bucks?"

Reduced to notation, this isn't a logic problem without a goal, i.e. "prove thIs follows from this" or "earn 500 dollars" or "prove p is logically equivalent to q" is nowhere to be found.

>> No.4241658

>>4241642
Yep, keep telling yourself this so you feel better about your initial response. Sadness. LOL. I told you that you were wrong hours ago, didn't I? I like how you begrudgingly cling to the hope obtuse semantics proffers. Really, so very logical.

>> No.4241667

>>4241658
Ok guy

>> No.4241672

>>4241667
ok indeed

>> No.4241674

>>4241642
Raises a good question indeed

>> No.4241687

>>4241674
Lol, you enjoy supporting your own posts by implicitly posing as another person don't you? Or maybe it's just the largest coincidence ever that random people take such a favorable interest in everything you type. Yes, that must be it. Regardless of the focus on logic itt, people are drawn to your non-logical posts with by the hypnotic elixir that is your prose.

>> No.4241691

>>4241687
This irony is blowing my mind

Praise me more

>> No.4241701

>>4241691
Whom am I to praise? The explicit you, the implicit you, or the phantom other?

>> No.4241708

>>4241701
You just praised me by replying to me, even if it was ununtentional; or rather it's funny because it was unintentional.

>> No.4241716

>>4241708
LOL. I enjoy how you set up your own rules, coincidentally enough which work entirely in your favor, as we go. I suppose this response will somehow also work in your favor. It's like chess, except you get to smash the board and award yourself points for doing so.