Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GOPcapitalist
No Walt. It's a logically deduced necessity of causation.

Let's check the dictionary.

deduction; 1. the act of deducing. 2. logic Reasoning from stated premises to the formally valid conclusion; reasoning from the general to the specific. 3. an inference or conclusion.

Under synonyns for inference:

conclusion, consequence, deduction, demonstration, induction. A conclusion is the absolute and necessary result of the admision of certain premises; an inference is a probable conclusion, towards which known facts, statements, or admissions point, but which do not absolutely establish; sound premises together with their necessary conclusions constituture a demonstration."

You have stated something as fact which you cannot, using your own words, absolutely establish.

Walt

155 posted on 04/30/2002 3:50:59 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
Let's check the dictionary.

Yawn! Which dictionary, Walt? And what makes that dictionary the authority on the said terms? Is it a philosophical dictionary, a regular desktop dictionary, a medical dictionary, a legal dictionary? Which one?

deduction; 1. the act of deducing.

Now isn't that a profound observation.

2. logic Reasoning from stated premises to the formally valid conclusion; reasoning from the general to the specific.

In which case, my argument functions perfectly.

Premise 1 - In order to knowingly act upon X one must first be aware of X.
Premise 2 - Lincoln knowingly acted upon X by directing Corwin to substitute it for Y.
Conclusion: Therefore Lincoln must have been aware of X.

Under synonyns for inference:

Now where exactly did inference enter into the picture? Oh wait. I forgot. You are out of substance in your argument and are therefore stringing together words by association in order that you may rely upon semantics to get you out of your bind. When all else fails, rely on semantics...

A conclusion is the absolute and necessary result of the admision of certain premises

There you have it then, Walt. Check my premises as stated above and elsewhere. Check my conclusion. It is the necessary result of those premises. As I noted earlier, I invite you to question them all you want. You have not done so to date.

You have stated something as fact which you cannot, using your own words, absolutely establish.

If that is so, please demonstrate it to be. Demonstrate that my conclusion does not establish with certitude that Lincoln knew the Corwin amendment. I patiently await your response.

164 posted on 04/30/2002 8:25:46 AM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies ]

To: WhiskeyPapa
Would you sign off to the posulate that irrespective of whether the slave states had a right to succeed, that it was necessary to crush them and their adherence to a peculiar institution nonetheless when they exercised such "right?"
214 posted on 05/03/2002 9:26:56 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson