feat: updated arguments

frontend/src/Config/Format.elm

@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ pageList =
     [ spacing 40
     , centerX
     , centerY
-    , moveDown 30
     , alignTop
+    , paddingEach { top = 30, bottom = 30, left = 0, right = 0 }
     ]
 
 

frontend/src/Cuckery/CuckList/CliffHarvey/CliffHarvey.elm

@@ -8,11 +8,11 @@ cuckCliffHarvey =
     let
         name : String
         name =
-            ""
+            "Cliff Harvey"
     in
     { cuckImage = formatCuckName name
     , cuckName = name
-    , cuckSocial = "Cliff Harvey"
+    , cuckSocial = "https://twitter.com/CarbAppropriate"
     , cuckDodges =
         [ { dodgeLink = "https://x.com/CarbAppropriate/status/1372281626206507010?s=20"
           , dodgeDescription = NoReply

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/AncestralDiets.elm

@@ -1,54 +0,0 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Ancestry.AncestralDiets exposing (..)
-
-import Debate.Types exposing (..)
-
-
-argumentAncestralDiets : Argument
-argumentAncestralDiets =
-    { argumentTitle = "Argument for Using the Term Retard"
-    , propositionTitle = ""
-    , propositionSummary = ""
-    , proofLink = ""
-    , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = "C(x)"
-          , definiens = "(x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised"
-          }
-        , { definiendum = "B(x)"
-          , definiens = "(x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage"
-          }
-        , { definiendum = "D(x)"
-          , definiens = "oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur"
-          }
-        , { definiendum = "S(x)"
-          , definiens = "it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations"
-          }
-        , { definiendum = "A(x)"
-          , definiens = "it is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning"
-          }
-        , { definiendum = "r"
-          , definiens = "retard"
-          }
-        ]
-    , argumentFormalization =
-        [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = "For all slurs, (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised if and only if, (x) slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Cx↔Bx))"
-                  }
-                , { premise = "For all slurs, if it is not the case that (x) slur's negative connotations have been neutralised, then oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of (x) slur."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(¬Cx→Dx))"
-                  }
-                , { premise = "It is not the case that the term retard's negative connotations have been neutralised."
-                  , notation = "(¬Cr)"
-                  }
-                , { premise = "If the term retard has not been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage and oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of the term retard, then it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations."
-                  , notation = "(¬Br∧Dr→Sr)"
-                  }
-                , { premise = "If it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations, then It is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning."
-                  , notation = "(Sr→Ar)"
-                  }
-                ]
-          , conclusion = "Therefore, it is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ar)"
-          }
-        ]
-    }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/AntagonisticPleiotropy.elm

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy =
           , definiens = "antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods"
           }
         , { definiendum = "R"
-          , definiens = "ancestral diets have inherent disadvantages over novel diets"
+          , definiens = "ancestral foods have inherent disadvantages over novel foods"
           }
         ]
     , argumentFormalization =
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy =
                   , notation = "(P)"
                   }
                 ]
-          , conclusion = "Therefore, ancestral diets have inherent disadvantages over novel diets"
+          , conclusion = "Therefore, ancestral foods have inherent disadvantages over novel foods"
           , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
           }
         ]

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/ArtificialManipulation.elm

@@ -1,54 +0,0 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Ancestry.ArtificialManipulation exposing (..)
-
-import Debate.Types exposing (..)
-
-
-argumentArtificialManipulation : Argument
-argumentArtificialManipulation =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
-    , propositionSummary = "Summary"
-    , proofLink = ""
-    , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        ]
-    , argumentFormalization =
-        [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                ]
-          , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
-          }
-        ]
-    }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/HeathSeeker.elm

@@ -5,50 +5,44 @@ import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 argumentHealthSeeker : Argument
 argumentHealthSeeker =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
-    , propositionSummary = "Summary"
-    , proofLink = ""
+     { argumentTitle = "Ancestral Health Consistency Checker"
+    , propositionTitle = "If someone (who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk) is not in favour of consuming a novel food (that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food), then that person would be acting against their values."
+    , propositionSummary = "Essentially, if our interlocutor identifies as \"F\", then all we need to do is demonstrate to them that \"N\" exists, and we're essentially home free. If they accept that \"N\" exists and they also identify as \"F\", then they should be in favour of substituting such a novel food for such an ancestral food. If they don't then they have a contradiction."
+    , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~7xFx~1~7yNy~5~6x~6y(~3Cxy~5Ax)),(~7xFx),(~7yNy)%7C=(~6x~6y(~3Cxy~5Ax))"
     , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        [ { definiendum = "F(x)"
+          , definiens = "there exists (x) who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of (y) because they value reducing disease risk"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "N(y)"
+          , definiens = "there exists a (y) that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "C(x,y)"
+          , definiens = "(x) is in favour of consuming that (y)"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "A(x)"
+          , definiens = "(x) would be acting against their values"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "someone"
+          , definiens = "x"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "novel foods"
+          , definiens = "y"
           }
         ]
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                [ { premise = "If there exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk, and there exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food, then if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values."
+                  , notation = "(∃xFx∧∃yNy→∀x∀y(¬Cxy→Ax))"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "There exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk."
+                  , notation = "(∃xFx)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "There exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food."
+                  , notation = "(∃yNy)"
                   }
                 ]
-          , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
+          , conclusion = "Therefore, if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values."
+          , conclusionNotation = "(∴∀x∀y(¬Cxy→Ax))"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/ImmortalityReductio.elm

@@ -5,50 +5,41 @@ import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 argumentImmortalityReductio : Argument
 argumentImmortalityReductio =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
+    { argumentTitle = "Appeal to Nature Immortality Reductio"
+    , propositionTitle = "Senescence does not result in death"
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
-    , proofLink = ""
+    , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Hx~5~3Rxy)),(Hs)%7C=(~3Rsd)"
     , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        [ { definiendum = "H(x)"
+          , definiens = "humans undergo (x)"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "R(x,y)"
+          , definiens = "(x) results in (y)"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "x"
+          , definiens = "normal physiological process"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "y"
+          , definiens = "negative health outcome"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "s"
+          , definiens = "senescence"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "d"
+          , definiens = "death"
           }
         ]
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                [ { premise = "If humans undergo a normal physiological process, then the normal physiological process does not result in a negative health outcome."
+                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(Hx→¬Rxy))"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "Humans undergo senescence."
+                  , notation = "(Hs)"
                   }
                 ]
-          , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
+          , conclusion = "Therefore, senescence does not result in death."
+          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Rsd)"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ancestry/PolyphenolReductio.elm

@@ -5,50 +5,56 @@ import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 argumentPolyphenolReductio : Argument
 argumentPolyphenolReductio =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
+    { argumentTitle = "Harmful Polyphenol Reductio"
+    , propositionTitle = "Genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful."
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
-    , proofLink = ""
+    , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Hx~1Cxy~5Vxy)),(Hp),(Cpg),(Vpg~5Mpg),(Vpg)%7C=(Mpg)"
     , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        [ { definiendum = "H(x)"
+          , definiens = "(x) is harmful"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "C(x,y)"
+          , definiens = "(x) is contained in (y)"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "V(x,y)"
+          , definiens = "(x) renders (y) harmful"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "M(p,g)"
+          , definiens = "genetic modification that removes (p) renders (g) less harmful"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "x"
+          , definiens = "plant defense chemicals"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "y"
+          , definiens = "food"
+          }
+        , { definiendum = "p"
+          , definiens = "polyphenols from grass"
+          }
+        , { definiendum = "g"
+          , definiens = "grass-fed beef"
           }
         ]
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                [ { premise = "If plant defense chemicals are harmful and plant defense chemicals are contained in a food, then plant defense chemicals render the food harmful."
+                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(Hx∧Cxy→Vxy))"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "Polyphenols from grass are harmful."
+                  , notation = "(Hp)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "Polyphenols from grass are contained in grass-fed beef."
+                  , notation = "(Cpg)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "If polyphenols from grass render grass-fed beef harmful, then genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful."
+                  , notation = "(Vpg→Mpg)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "Polyphenols from grass render grass-fed beef harmful."
+                  , notation = "(Vpg)"
                   }
                 ]
-          , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
+          , conclusion = "Therefore, genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful."
+          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Mpg)"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Nutrition/AnabolicKeto.elm

@@ -5,50 +5,35 @@ import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 argumentAnabolicKeto : Argument
 argumentAnabolicKeto =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
+    { argumentTitle = "Anabolic Opportunity Cost on Keto"
+    , propositionTitle = "Ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets."
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
-    , proofLink = ""
+    , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)|=(R)"
     , definitionTable =
-        [ { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        [ { definiendum = "P"
+          , definiens = "a higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "Q"
+          , definiens = "a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets"
           }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
-          }
-        , { definiendum = ""
-          , definiens = ""
+        , { definiendum = "R"
+          , definiens = "ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets"
           }
         ]
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
-                [ { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                [ { premise = "If a higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets."
+                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "A higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets."
+                  , notation = "(P)"
                   }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
-                  }
-                , { premise = ""
-                  , notation = ""
+                , { premise = "If a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets."
+                  , notation = "(Q→R)"
                   }
                 ]
-          , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
+          , conclusion = "Therefore, ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets."
+          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
           }
         ]
     }