mirror of
https://gitlab.com/upRootNutrition/obsidian.git
synced 2025-06-15 16:15:11 -05:00
4.7 KiB
Executable file
4.7 KiB
Executable file
Debate 1
Proposition
"something has a soul if it has the capacity for human-level intelligence and has a consciousness"
Semantics
- capacity for intelligence
- 16B neurons
Debate 2
Pepsi Monodiet Reductio
| Definiendum | Definiens |
|---|---|
| S | the consumption of (x) something has only been studied in the context of consuming (y) something else |
| T | it is known what effects (x) something has in the absence of (y) something else |
| R | it is rational to consume a monodiet of (x) something |
| m | meat |
| c | plants |
| p | Pepsi |
P1) 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.
(∀x∀y(Sxy→¬Txy))
P2) 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.
(∀x∀y(Rx↔¬Txy))
P3) The consumption of meat has only been studied in the context of plant consumption.
(Sma)
P4) The consumption of Pepsi has only been studied in the context of meat consumption.
(Spm)
P5) 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.
(¬Tma→¬Tpm)
C) Therefore, it is rational to consume a monodiet of Pepsi.
(∴Rp)
(∀x∀y(Sxy→¬Txy))
P2) 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.
(∀x∀y(Rx↔¬Txy))
P3) The consumption of meat has only been studied in the context of plant consumption.
(Sma)
P4) The consumption of Pepsi has only been studied in the context of meat consumption.
(Spm)
P5) 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.
(¬Tma→¬Tpm)
C) Therefore, it is rational to consume a monodiet of Pepsi.
(∴Rp)
Debate 1
Argument for High Quality Research
| Definiendum | Definiens |
|---|---|
| H | A study (x) counts as high quality |
| U | A study can be applied to anyone universally on a population level (meaning perfect external validity) |
| e | An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism |
P1) 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).
(∀x(Hx↔Ux))
P2) 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).
(¬Ue)
P3) An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism counts as high quality.
(He)
C) 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.
(∴He∧¬He)
(∀x(Hx↔Ux))
P2) 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).
(¬Ue)
P3) An experiment with humans in a lab under constant observation and controls for life or a direct mechanism counts as high quality.
(He)
C) 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.
(∴He∧¬He)
Hashtags
#debate #debate_opponents #clowns #clownery