Re: What’s the most effective way to debunk moral relativism / subjectivism?
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2018 2:50 pm
You aren't helping your case here because this makes it apparent that you don't have a good understanding of logic. What I said can be confirmed by just looking up the definitions or opening an introductory textbook on logic. A syllogism is a very specific form of argument that has two premises where those premises share a term with the conclusion. For example, "All dogs have hair, "Ralph is a dog", "Therefore Ralph has hair".brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:56 pm Unsubstantiated claim. Of course they can not be converted into syllogisms if they are bad arguments, or too vague to parse.
But any sound complex argument can probably be broken down into a number of syllogisms which work together to form a whole argument.
There are vast sums of first order arguments that aren't syllogism and any propositional argument isn't a syllogism.
Interesting....why aren't you taking your own advise? You have some of the longest most verbose posts here....why aren't you formalizing your arguments or at least condensing them into gross form?brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:56 pm Then stop being so "subtle and expressive". This is a place for logical discourse, not for you to weasel out of defending your claims because everything is just so subjective.
Right...as I said you're not only asking people to provide arguments but to provide arguments you believe are good. That requirement will obviously lead to an echo-chamber since you're using your own judgement to measure arguments. You seem to believe this makes sense because you believe yourself to some sort of god of logic which is amusing.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:56 pm A bad logically invalid argument doesn't qualify.
Personal assertions of incredulity and misrepresenting studies doesn't qualify as evidence either.
Again just demonstrating that you haven't even studied elementary logic. Syllogisms are easy to evaluate because there are only 24 valid syllogistic forms but the vast majority of complex arguments cannot be given in syllogistic form.brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 1:56 pm I'm perfectly capable of evaluating whether a syllogism is valid or not without bias.
If you are worried about people judging your arguments, make them more clear as syllogisms.
In any case, as I said formalizing arguments can be valuable but its typically a difficult process and there are many points of failure. But even once you've formalized an argument evaluating it is not straight-forward. You seem to be unaware of the fact that first-order logic is undecidable, that is, there is no procedure you can use to determine whether a first-order argument (or statement) is valid or invalid.
You're going to learn much more if you stop fooling yourself into thinking you have mastery of subjects you clearly don't understand well.