mirror of
https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git
synced 2025-06-15 15:35:12 -05:00
72 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
72 lines
2.1 KiB
Markdown
|
# Debate 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Proposition
|
||
|
|
>"the claim that killing a particular carnist reduces total rights violations is unfalsifiable"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Semantic Analysis
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Unclear Terms
|
||
|
|
1. unfalsifiable
|
||
|
|
1. still no clue
|
||
|
|
1. a hypothesis is falsifiable if and only if demonstrating the negation of the hypothesis is practically achievable
|
||
|
|
2. a hypothesis is unfalsifiable if and only if demonstrating the negation of the hypothesis is impractical
|
||
|
|
2. disprove
|
||
|
|
1.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Clarified Proposition
|
||
|
|
>demonstrating the negation of the hypothesis that "killing a particular carnist reduces total rights violations" is impractical
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Questions
|
||
|
|
1.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Dom's Rebuttal
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
>Both "killing X reduces rights violations" (A) and its negation "killing X does not reduce rights violations" (B) are falsifiable, as long as the goalposts arent moved. For both you can devise some experiment where we observe rights violations (in a set area, for a given time, etc), kill X, observe rights violations under the same constraints again. Lets label the results "less rights violations observed" P and "equal or more rights violations observed Q. Under:
|
||
|
|
>
|
||
|
|
>A+P, A is not rejected
|
||
|
|
>A+Q, A is rejected
|
||
|
|
>B+P, B is rejected
|
||
|
|
>B+Q, B is not rejected
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Dom's Reductio
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<div style="text-align: center">
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>P1)</b></font> If one claims that killing a carnist is going to lower total rights violations and one can claim that the proof for the claim is obtainable, then the claim that killing a carnist is going to lower total rights violations is not falsifiable.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(P∧Q→¬R)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P2)</b></font> One claims that killing a carnist is going to lower total rights violations.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(P)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>P3)</b></font> One can claim that the proof for the claim is obtainable.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(Q)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<b>C)</b></font> Therefore, the claim that killing a carnist is going to lower total rights violations is not falsifiable.
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<font color="CC6600">
|
||
|
|
<b>(∴¬R)</b>
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
<br />
|
||
|
|
</font>
|
||
|
|
</div>
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
[Proof Tree](https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~1Q~5~3R),(P),(Q)|=(~3R))
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
# Hashtags
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
#debate
|
||
|
|
#debate_opponents
|