mirror of
https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git
synced 2025-06-16 00:15:12 -05:00
112 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
112 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
|
# Debate 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Proposition
|
||
|
|
>"something has a soul if it has the capacity for human-level intelligence and has a consciousness"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Semantics
|
||
|
|
1. capacity for intelligence
|
||
|
|
- 16B neurons
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Debate 2
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Pepsi Monodiet Reductio
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|
||
|
|
|:-------------------------------------------:|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**S**</font> | the consumption of (x) something has only been studied in the context of consuming (y) something else |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**T**</font> | it is known what effects (x) something has in the absence of (y) something else |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**R**</font> | it is rational to consume a monodiet of (x) something |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**m**</font> | meat |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**c**</font> | plants |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**p**</font> | Pepsi |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>P1)</b></font> If the consumption of something has only been studied in the context of consuming something else, then it is not known what effects something has in the absence of something else.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∀x∀y(Sxy→¬Txy))</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P2)</b></font> It is reasonable to consume a monodiet of something if and only if it is not known what effects something has in the absence of something else.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∀x∀y(Rx↔¬Txy))</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P3)</b></font> The consumption of meat has only been studied in the context of plant consumption.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(Sma)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P4)</b></font> The consumption of Pepsi has only been studied in the context of meat consumption.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(Spm)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P5)</b></font> If is not known what effects meat has in the absence of plants, then it is not known what effects Pepsi has in the absence of meat.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(¬Tma→¬Tpm)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is rational to consume a monodiet of Pepsi.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∴Rp)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
</font>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Sxy~5~3Txy)),(~6x~6y(Rx~4~3Txy)),(Sma),(Spm),(~3Tma~5~3Tpm)|=(Rp))
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Debate 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Argument for High Quality Research
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**Definiendum**</font> | <font color="CC6600">**Definiens**</font> |
|
||
|
|
|:-------------------------------------------:|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**H**</font> | A study (x) counts as high quality |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**U**</font> | A study can be applied to anyone universally on a population level (meaning perfect external validity) |
|
||
|
|
| <font color="CC6600">**e**</font> | An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>P1)</b></font> A study counts as high quality if, and only if, the study can be applied to anyone universally on a population level (meaning perfect external validity).
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∀x(Hx↔Ux))</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P2)</b></font> An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism can not be applied to anyone universally on a population level (meaning imperfect external validity).
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(¬Ue)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P3)</b></font> An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism counts as high quality.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(He)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, it is and it not the case that an experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism counts as high quality.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∴He∧¬He)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
</font>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Hx~4Ux)),(~3Ue),(He)|=(He~1~3He))
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Hashtags
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
#debate
|
||
|
|
#debate_opponents
|
||
|
|
#clowns
|
||
|
|
#clownery
|