I just found this video, and I love it. It was humorous, yet super informative. I'm sad that you didn't continue to make more videos. But bravo for this one!
Wow..I was like this channel explains the concept clearly. I should check other videos and guess what :(((( this is the only video and it's from two years ago. Why not make more videos pls?? T . T
Consider the statement all members of the null set are even. This must be vacuously true. Now consider the statement all members of the null set are not even. This must also be vacuously true. All members of the null set are both even and not even, which appears to be a contradiction. Is there a way around this?
We say that an implication p --> q is vaccuously true if p is false. Since now it's impossible to have p true and q false. That is we can't check anymore whether the contrary, p being true and q being false,can be.Since p being true is non-existent. So we take the implication as true. For eg. If 3 squared = 27,then 2+2=5. Can we check if it is indeed true that 3 squared equals 27 then 2+2 is not 5. No. Because 3 squared equals 27 is non-existent. Or false. So we can't check if the statement is false. Hence it must be true.
Bro as empty we no need to check any thing like all the elements in empty set are fool. So you say to take vacuously true but y can't we say vacuously false . You video is great
I don't like this convention for vacuous truths. Because when you don't own a car you can say 1) "All of the cars I own are Lamborghinis" and 2) "None of the cars I own are Lamborghinis" and both statements are considered true. Then because 2 is true, you determine 1 is false and you're left with a contradiction that 1 is both true and false.
Yeah, I'd agree with that. I think after staring at the script for long enough, none of them were funny, so it was hard to figure out good delivery. If I ever do another one of these, I'm definitely gonna try and improve with that.
Honestly, this term should die quickly. It is a view that only makes sense if you are a platonist. It makes no sense to assign truth or falsity to nonexistent entities - they don't exist. What does it even mean to say something *true* about them? What does it mean to say something false? Falsity has this trait that it's inaccurate, doesn't it? If you say all your children are cats, but you have no children, if I had to ascribe the sentence a label, it would be inacurrate, and therefore false. Or I could just deny that your nonexistent children really are cats. I could cry that it's inocherent. Further, if you still cling onto it being true, I could demand you defend how the statement "all your children are non-cats" is simultaneously also true, supposedly. Yet it's obviously a contradiction, so let's stop pretending and rid ourselves of the concept that you can assign properties, including truth and falsehood to nonexistant things.
I really would like it to be called "default false"... Because we are at same time so brainwashed that things are 'true" only if you can prove them true
This was a really well made video. I was kinda surprised to see this was a brand new channel
please come back, this is one of the most intuitive explainations i've seen on youtube about vacuous truths 😭😭
I just found this video, and I love it. It was humorous, yet super informative.
I'm sad that you didn't continue to make more videos.
But bravo for this one!
It's that you have given up on TH-cam, this video was absolutely brilliant. Hope you're doing well in your other endeavors.
You should come back and make more videos. This was great
this is the only actual video of substance on vacuous truth out of the 10 I just watched AND you're hilarious! so much support to you
the only non-vacuous video on vacuous truths? heheh
the lamborghini example helped a lot, thx sexy mccool-guy
Good job Teo
Amazing.
All the best. Subbed.
This actualy gave me a lot of intuition about conditional statements, thanks.
thanks for taking me out of a hole of confusion and stressfull mindmelting anger for not understanding such a simple concept
This is the best explanation of vacuous truths. Bravo
Agree!!
More videos please!! This is brilliant!
Wow..I was like this channel explains the concept clearly. I should check other videos and guess what :(((( this is the only video and it's from two years ago. Why not make more videos pls?? T . T
This is a very good video. congratulations
Don't give up keep going
It's a very good video. I hope you make more!
You explanation is amazing
This video alone makes me click the subscription button. Idon't know why. LOL
And it happens that this video saddly was only one in this channel..
damn this video is good plz keep making more videos like this plz
good shit why did i get it recommended just now
Consider the statement all members of the null set are even. This must be vacuously true.
Now consider the statement all members of the null set are not even. This must also be vacuously true.
All members of the null set are both even and not even, which appears to be a contradiction.
Is there a way around this?
Why did you give up on making videos?
Very good
Come back sir😭
We say that an implication p --> q is vaccuously true if p is false.
Since now it's impossible to have p true and q false.
That is we can't check anymore whether the contrary, p being true and q being false,can be.Since p being true is non-existent.
So we take the implication as true.
For eg. If 3 squared = 27,then 2+2=5.
Can we check if it is indeed true that 3 squared equals 27 then 2+2 is not 5.
No.
Because 3 squared equals 27 is non-existent. Or false.
So we can't check if the statement is false.
Hence it must be true.
You started well. Why you stopped?
Lauged my ass off
RETURN
Bro as empty we no need to check any thing like all the elements in empty set are fool. So you say to take vacuously true but y can't we say vacuously false . You video is great
Thanks!
. How are you now
dope
good video man :)
I am waiting
Without any elements, you can’t have a SET of anything. A set is DEPENDENT on it’s elements, not vice versa. Vacuous truths are illogical.
I don't like this convention for vacuous truths. Because when you don't own a car you can say 1) "All of the cars I own are Lamborghinis" and 2) "None of the cars I own are Lamborghinis" and both statements are considered true. Then because 2 is true, you determine 1 is false and you're left with a contradiction that 1 is both true and false.
make more
Fluid animation, clever point, but imo you kinda bomb on some of your jokes 😋
Yeah, I'd agree with that. I think after staring at the script for long enough, none of them were funny, so it was hard to figure out good delivery. If I ever do another one of these, I'm definitely gonna try and improve with that.
68th subscriber , wish i was 69th lol
Honestly, this term should die quickly. It is a view that only makes sense if you are a platonist.
It makes no sense to assign truth or falsity to nonexistent entities - they don't exist. What does it even mean to say something *true* about them? What does it mean to say something false? Falsity has this trait that it's inaccurate, doesn't it? If you say all your children are cats, but you have no children, if I had to ascribe the sentence a label, it would be inacurrate, and therefore false. Or I could just deny that your nonexistent children really are cats. I could cry that it's inocherent. Further, if you still cling onto it being true, I could demand you defend how the statement "all your children are non-cats" is simultaneously also true, supposedly. Yet it's obviously a contradiction, so let's stop pretending and rid ourselves of the concept that you can assign properties, including truth and falsehood to nonexistant things.
The aristotlian has spoken
I really would like it to be called "default false"...
Because we are at same time so brainwashed that things are 'true" only if you can prove them true
No such thing as brainwashing.