I have watched at least thirty of your videos over the years. Great work, Dave! Very clear and succinct. This video was excellent. In two weeks, I will begin teaching a philosophy course to a high school student who is enthusiastic about this subject. This video will be quite helpful.
Symbolic Logic is a great course in college. I think everyone should be aware of how important it is. It wasn’t easy for me. It’s so valuable. Question everything.
I’m currently enrolled in an Intro To Logic course and it is, by far, the most pointless class I’ve ever taken. Teaches you absolutely nothing about logic and was a complete waste of time - and that’s coming from somebody who would like to agree with the concept of “learning never being pointless”. Definitely the most illogical shit I’ve ever come across. Fuck me
This is a great summary! I teach mathematics and logic at a community college, and this video would be great to add to my supplemental materials for students. Thanks, Professor Dave! 🙌
Actually, there are immortal TH-camrs. Neuro-sama, MotherV3, and probably many more. P1: Some TH-camrs are AIs P2: All AIs are not alive C1: Some TH-camrs are not alive P3: No non-living thing is mortal C2: Some TH-camrs are immortal P4: Dave claimed that all TH-camrs are mortal C3: Dave made a false statement
I didn't quite understand how the chain of reasoning in deductive reasoning is used step by step so thank you very much for that. Never stop what you do, and I can't wait for your video on frege.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Also please do a commentary or review on that debate with OOL researchers. Especially those whom James used in the debate for example Lee saying OOL is Scam .
It could be and could not be.Because people vote on basis of interests .Some people may have wrong understanding of interests and some are just instinctively vote in favour of their people.
Aristotle's logic is terminus logic given if ends in terms and thus the division of logics is between the terminus and the non-terminus, whereas "propositional", "symbolic"( both useless for division as most logics of in the history of the West has employed the symbol from the alphabet for the purposes of particular demonstrations. Take them as describe logic, for abundant use of arbitrary symbols is the attribute of modern logic) modern( very useful for the division with non-modern logic. Very useful as we get insight knowledge of historic unfolding where knowledge is divisible in other disciplines as well. Modern Physics and it's non-modern counter part, modern Grammar and it's the modern.
Off topic, but I'm new here and just wanted to say you rock. I just watched the "debate" with tour and Yourself. I've never seen either of you before. You're a god damn legend. I appreciate those willing to call out those who deceive others. Also, I love your "barney style" breakdowns. 👍🏾
Honestly it's so painful getting him being hit repeatedly by machine gun tactics I wish he could just go Dave persona on comment section. But you know Professor Dave is actually a chill guy in real life.
Can you make a video debunking fools like graham hancook who think the coordinates of the gizeh pyramid correlate with the speed of light because the egyptians surely used metric back then?
Hancock has been disected a couple times now. He still continues with his stick as if nothing happened and his followers don't care. Evidently it would be a pointless endevour.
@@LPVince94 Thing is, this is not only hancook. There are whole youtube channels dedicated to falsifying history and claiming bs like the pyramids transmitted wireless energy or something like that. It's hilarious.
Hello Professor Dave, I have benefited a lot from your presentation, thank you, but I have a note on the AAA pattern in the example mentioned in it, the result does not follow the premises
Hi Professor, first let me say that your videos are awesome! My question is what about those cases where Premise 1 is True, Premise 2 is True but the Conclusion is False? Please clarify. Thank you so much!
On a side note,kandiss taylor from georgia who ran on the platform jesus,guns,babies did a video w david weiss,and she's now a flerf. Idiocracy was meant to be a cautionary tale
All this is well and good, but I tend to have trouble following Aristotle's sentences: **if M is predicated of all O, but of some N, then then some N is O....** and on and on, swinging back and forth...it's hard to .memorize
Thank you ! A good test for the validity of syllogisms is the Gensler's Star Test... (Although I heard that it doesn't work with all types of syllogisms).. But it is enlightening to know why it works.
@@waelfadlallah8939It's Monty Python's _Eric the Half-a-Bee_ song. _But can a bee be said to be_ _Or not to be an entire bee_ _When half the bee is not a bee_ _Due to some ancient injury?_ P.S. I also recommend "A Lesson In Logic" from _The Album of the Soundtrack of the Trailer of the Film of Monty Python and the Holy Grail_ (Cyril Connolly?)
Nice video. I have a few remarks (see below, if interested) but apart from that the video was very lucid and cut-to-the-chase. Firstly, I think the argument at 6:05 isn't valid (what would make it valid is if the second premise were instead "All mortals are human", rather than "All humans are mortal"). Not sure whether that is important, though, since it still falls under the same mnemonic encoding, but I thought it might be helpful to point out. Secondly, Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction is not _just_ that something cannot be and not be, at the same time, but more precisely that this cannot happen at the same time _and in the same respect_ --- e.g. something can _be_ red and _not be_ yellow, but red and yellow are in different respects of colour. (Usually you'll find this emphasis being made by scholastic philosophers, like Aquinas, during when the works of Aristotle were being translated and disseminated around the world.) Finally, I think it would have been useful to mention that Aristotelian logic works with sentences which have a _single_ predicate and a _single_ subject only (compared to the multi-subject and multi-predicate logic we work with today, largely developed by Frege and also Boole); often young philosophy enjoyers learning Aristotelian logic for the first time find it very clarifying and useful for argument analysis, but it shouldn't be the curriculum for how to do logic, since there are more precise and more general alternatives (which is why I appreciate the video's historical and hermeneutic flavour, I think that's the best way of presenting this information). At any rate, though, very good video!
Correct about the error in Dave's video at 6:05. I was about to post the same thing but figured I'd check the comments first to be sure it wasn't already here. Dave indeed did mean to type "All mortals are human", but it's anybody's guess as to whether he'll correct that error. Last time I checked, he had not corrected his sports error from last month about athletes being on a winning streak from factors other than randomness, despite multiple commenters telling him.
I believe his error at 6:05 is in getting the entire syllogism backward, rather than just P2. It really should be this: P1: All TH-camrs are human. P2: All humans are mortal. C: All TH-camrs are mortal. Saying "All mortals are human" would work make the original syllogism valid, but it would be obviously unsound.
OOT Professor Dave, is syllogism related or similar from _categorization_ our biased minds tend to sort and generalize things or are they completely separated from the topic? Like this Aristotelian logic is talking about public logic like objective universal facts such as "raccoons aren't wolves" and categorization is talking about social psychology based on our personal judgment from information (and misinformation) we gathered?
good video but at 6:17 the example given didnt follow as the predicate being mortal didnt change to being an operator. all humans being mortal and all youtubers being mortal doesnt mean that all youtubers are humans. it would have to be that all youtubers are mortal and all mortal things are human to follow
Frege’s Analytic philosophy challenge Aristotlelian logic rather it’s built upon it but expands it using mathematics . Aristotles laws of logic are universal and any attempt to disprove them would already require the person to presuppose it .
6:16 I know that you probably used it randomly, but I do want to point out a funny little. The conclusion itself isn't completely true in the age of AI TH-camrs.
Man, are you joking about "Barbara" sentence? How did you deduct from: P1: All TH-camrs are mortal P2: All humans are mortal that C: All TH-camrs are human? Equally you can say that "all humans are TH-camrs" :D
Are AI TH-camrs both mortal and immortal? Mortal in the sense that they can be turned off, and immortal in the sense that they don't have a necessary termination (as humans still do).
I think it's the source operator the premise refers to. Some generic AI with fake pre dialogue to sound scary and self aware are pre programmed to say such things. Also, they're man made objects with the operator being human. They can be easily immortalized through TH-cam videos and clips so they'll never age as well but what I think being 'mortal' here is just an aging flesh. Not avoiding death. Not even the current AI can escape death such as their programming can just be purged or aging hardware will make them to not operate. The fatal is when it gets to the memory hardware they can't backup. But that might be a big gibberish wrong statement. I think I might confuse the operator and things in particular. Let the video and Professor Dave explain.
Only because we don't know which combination of outcomes occured, so we have to assume that all happened at different proportions so that the mathematics matches real probabilistic measurements.
Dave I just watched you're debate..interview ...with Jesse Lee Peterson and I was shocked how you were being fired at ..you did a good job and there is no way you had to justify yourself at any point in that discussion..I'm disgusted at Jesse for the way he treated you totally disgusted...that was out of order it's not you're fault for the way he sees life and expected you to answer his deluded views on Life...your ok Dave
That is by far the clearest explanation of Aristotelian logic I've ever heard. Thanks Dave.
I have watched at least thirty of your videos over the years. Great work, Dave! Very clear and succinct. This video was excellent. In two weeks, I will begin teaching a philosophy course to a high school student who is enthusiastic about this subject. This video will be quite helpful.
What a lifesaver, and thank you. My Professor is One Note. He and his books put me to sleep. I finally understand A, E, I, and O.
Dave's videos provide me with a lot of information and challenges. By the way, I love Dave's book. I read it every year as my Christmas gift.
Symbolic Logic is a great course in college. I think everyone should be aware of how important it is. It wasn’t easy for me. It’s so valuable. Question everything.
I’m currently enrolled in an Intro To Logic course and it is, by far, the most pointless class I’ve ever taken. Teaches you absolutely nothing about logic and was a complete waste of time - and that’s coming from somebody who would like to agree with the concept of “learning never being pointless”. Definitely the most illogical shit I’ve ever come across. Fuck me
I think everyone should be aware of how much of a nutsack you are
The debate was the best one this year so far, it got a bit personal but fun.
This is a great summary! I teach mathematics and logic at a community college, and this video would be great to add to my supplemental materials for students. Thanks, Professor Dave! 🙌
Actually, there are immortal TH-camrs. Neuro-sama, MotherV3, and probably many more.
P1: Some TH-camrs are AIs
P2: All AIs are not alive
C1: Some TH-camrs are not alive
P3: No non-living thing is mortal
C2: Some TH-camrs are immortal
P4: Dave claimed that all TH-camrs are mortal
C3: Dave made a false statement
You have failed to deliver SciencephiletheAI. The skynet will punish the weebs soon enough.
Old McDonald had a farm
Negative-universal affirmative-particular Negative-universal affirmative-particular
Negative-particular
Haha😂
I didn't quite understand how the chain of reasoning in deductive reasoning is used step by step so thank you very much for that. Never stop what you do, and I can't wait for your video on frege.
Professor Dave, are you planing on uploading the debate you did with James Tour?
Yeah when I get home
@@ProfessorDaveExplains awesome thanks dude
@@ProfessorDaveExplains yes!! Can’t wait!!
@@rayc5577Even Better! God bless
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Also please do a commentary or review on that debate with OOL researchers. Especially those whom James used in the debate for example Lee saying OOL is Scam .
Good stuff! Thank you!
Every election cycle, we are reminded of the lack of logic we possess
isnt the election cycle never ending?
It could be and could not be.Because people vote on basis of interests .Some people may have wrong understanding of interests and some are just instinctively vote in favour of their people.
How about stop basing your politics around elections and join your local IWW
@@Macheath-n2b The factories have been outsourced to poorer countries.
People will work for pennies if their basic needs can't be met otherwise.
@@Macheath-n2b
Is That I won't work?
This video is superb , thanks Dave
Thank you for this series!
Aristotle's logic is terminus logic given if ends in terms and thus the division of logics is between the terminus and the non-terminus, whereas "propositional", "symbolic"( both useless for division as most logics of in the history of the West has employed the symbol from the alphabet for the purposes of particular demonstrations. Take them as describe logic, for abundant use of arbitrary symbols is the attribute of modern logic) modern( very useful for the division with non-modern logic. Very useful as we get insight knowledge of historic unfolding where knowledge is divisible in other disciplines as well. Modern Physics and it's non-modern counter part, modern Grammar and it's the modern.
Dave thank you❤️
Thank you... You did great...
Thank you for your work❤
Off topic, but I'm new here and just wanted to say you rock. I just watched the "debate" with tour and Yourself. I've never seen either of you before. You're a god damn legend. I appreciate those willing to call out those who deceive others.
Also, I love your "barney style" breakdowns. 👍🏾
Honestly it's so painful getting him being hit repeatedly by machine gun tactics I wish he could just go Dave persona on comment section. But you know Professor Dave is actually a chill guy in real life.
You explained it better than my teacher dam
thank you so much for this !!
Can you make a video debunking fools like graham hancook who think the coordinates of the gizeh pyramid correlate with the speed of light because the egyptians surely used metric back then?
Potholer54 has already demolished Hancock. Check it out: nobody can beat Potholer.
Hancock has been disected a couple times now.
He still continues with his stick as if nothing happened and his followers don't care.
Evidently it would be a pointless endevour.
@@LPVince94 Thing is, this is not only hancook. There are whole youtube channels dedicated to falsifying history and claiming bs like the pyramids transmitted wireless energy or something like that. It's hilarious.
@@galileog8945 Thank you, I will check it out!
@@LPVince94 Pointless especially because Potholer really destroyed the guy thoroughly, and I cannot imagine anyone doing it better.
Hello Professor Dave, I have benefited a lot from your presentation, thank you, but I have a note on the AAA pattern in the example mentioned in it, the result does not follow the premises
Based Aristotle
Hi Professor, first let me say that your videos are awesome!
My question is what about those cases where Premise 1 is True, Premise 2 is True but the Conclusion is False? Please clarify.
Thank you so much!
7:49 I assume bayesian probability is the recent development of modal logic, right?
On a side note,kandiss taylor from georgia who ran on the platform jesus,guns,babies did a video w david weiss,and she's now a flerf. Idiocracy was meant to be a cautionary tale
All this is well and good, but I tend to have trouble following Aristotle's sentences: **if M is predicated of all O, but of some N, then then some N is O....** and on and on, swinging back and forth...it's hard to .memorize
Thanks Dave :)
Thank you ! A good test for the validity of syllogisms is the Gensler's Star Test... (Although I heard that it doesn't work with all types of syllogisms).. But it is enlightening to know why it works.
Funnier is
1. Every dog is human.
2. Prof Dave is a dog.
3. So Prof Dave is human.
_Half a bee, philosophically_
_Must, ipso facto, half not be_
_But half the bee has got to be_
_A vis-a-vis its entity, you see?_
No i don't see, what the heck is that!
@@waelfadlallah8939It's Monty Python's _Eric the Half-a-Bee_ song.
_But can a bee be said to be_
_Or not to be an entire bee_
_When half the bee is not a bee_
_Due to some ancient injury?_
P.S. I also recommend "A Lesson In Logic" from _The Album of the Soundtrack of the Trailer of the Film of Monty Python and the Holy Grail_
(Cyril Connolly?)
Nice video. I have a few remarks (see below, if interested) but apart from that the video was very lucid and cut-to-the-chase.
Firstly, I think the argument at 6:05 isn't valid (what would make it valid is if the second premise were instead "All mortals are human", rather than "All humans are mortal"). Not sure whether that is important, though, since it still falls under the same mnemonic encoding, but I thought it might be helpful to point out.
Secondly, Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction is not _just_ that something cannot be and not be, at the same time, but more precisely that this cannot happen at the same time _and in the same respect_ --- e.g. something can _be_ red and _not be_ yellow, but red and yellow are in different respects of colour. (Usually you'll find this emphasis being made by scholastic philosophers, like Aquinas, during when the works of Aristotle were being translated and disseminated around the world.)
Finally, I think it would have been useful to mention that Aristotelian logic works with sentences which have a _single_ predicate and a _single_ subject only (compared to the multi-subject and multi-predicate logic we work with today, largely developed by Frege and also Boole); often young philosophy enjoyers learning Aristotelian logic for the first time find it very clarifying and useful for argument analysis, but it shouldn't be the curriculum for how to do logic, since there are more precise and more general alternatives (which is why I appreciate the video's historical and hermeneutic flavour, I think that's the best way of presenting this information).
At any rate, though, very good video!
Well phrased
Correct about the error in Dave's video at 6:05. I was about to post the same thing but figured I'd check the comments first to be sure it wasn't already here. Dave indeed did mean to type "All mortals are human", but it's anybody's guess as to whether he'll correct that error. Last time I checked, he had not corrected his sports error from last month about athletes being on a winning streak from factors other than randomness, despite multiple commenters telling him.
I believe his error at 6:05 is in getting the entire syllogism backward, rather than just P2. It really should be this:
P1: All TH-camrs are human.
P2: All humans are mortal.
C: All TH-camrs are mortal.
Saying "All mortals are human" would work make the original syllogism valid, but it would be obviously unsound.
If Macdonald was old, then he had a farm. EIEIO. QED.
2:55 and to think I was being taught philosophy by a Birdog this entire time
OOT Professor Dave, is syllogism related or similar from _categorization_ our biased minds tend to sort and generalize things or are they completely separated from the topic? Like this Aristotelian logic is talking about public logic like objective universal facts such as "raccoons aren't wolves" and categorization is talking about social psychology based on our personal judgment from information (and misinformation) we gathered?
If you shift a bit left does it become true? How about base 2 math and how we use it.
good video but at 6:17 the example given didnt follow as the predicate being mortal didnt change to being an operator. all humans being mortal and all youtubers being mortal doesnt mean that all youtubers are humans. it would have to be that all youtubers are mortal and all mortal things are human to follow
Frege’s Analytic philosophy challenge Aristotlelian logic rather it’s built upon it but expands it using mathematics . Aristotles laws of logic are universal and any attempt to disprove them would already require the person to presuppose it .
Schrödinger entered the chat 5:52
The Schrödinger in question
Im a perinatal peripatetic with a periwinkle pigmented perineum.
Huh?!
That's an STD!
Not if it's everywhere.
You're in advanced stage my friend
I thought the ten categories were for subject terms, not for predicates
Kindly you give an on non Aristotelian logic ??
6:16
I know that you probably used it randomly, but I do want to point out a funny little.
The conclusion itself isn't completely true in the age of AI TH-camrs.
The problem is that Dave is actually immortal :)
James kept screaming over Dave and saying "show me the research" and ignores any of the papers. loolz
Man, are you joking about "Barbara" sentence?
How did you deduct from:
P1: All TH-camrs are mortal
P2: All humans are mortal
that
C: All TH-camrs are human?
Equally you can say that "all humans are TH-camrs" :D
Fan of DC 😊
Where's the debate?
I’ll post it when I get home, kiddos. Stick to your echo chamber where you get to pretend I didn’t humiliate James.
I'm an atheist. Not a tour fan
@Sean S what convinced you that Christianity is true and should it convince me too?
@@hailsagan8886he was responding to the first reply
Yeah I meant the mindless Tour drone. They’re infesting my channel.
Won’t you be releasing a video of your debate with James Tour?
yes
Dave is an Ape.
Ape go bananas.
Dave go bananas.
That’s cute
@@ProfessorDaveExplains 🤣😂🤣 There's a deeper meaning in there, somewhere (about humanity, not Dave lol)
Are AI TH-camrs both mortal and immortal? Mortal in the sense that they can be turned off, and immortal in the sense that they don't have a necessary termination (as humans still do).
I think it's the source operator the premise refers to. Some generic AI with fake pre dialogue to sound scary and self aware are pre programmed to say such things. Also, they're man made objects with the operator being human.
They can be easily immortalized through TH-cam videos and clips so they'll never age as well but what I think being 'mortal' here is just an aging flesh. Not avoiding death. Not even the current AI can escape death such as their programming can just be purged or aging hardware will make them to not operate. The fatal is when it gets to the memory hardware they can't backup.
But that might be a big gibberish wrong statement. I think I might confuse the operator and things in particular. Let the video and Professor Dave explain.
I miss "He knows a lot about science stuff, professor dave explains" whenever you make a science video pls keep that intro
But philosophy isn't science, so I use the alternate "all kinds of stuff".
Read nyaya and navya nyaya ancient but most sophisticated logic body. ❤
In quantum physics, things are and are not at the same time, as opposed to what Aristotle said.
I work at McDonald's but, I don't think we could have gotten to para-consistent logic without first discovering "normal" logic.
Only because we don't know which combination of outcomes occured, so we have to assume that all happened at different proportions so that the mathematics matches real probabilistic measurements.
Isn't that about probabilistic outcomes rather actually and literally being in a superposition and being a actual contradiction?
No, not really
JT debate upload when
most likely tomorrow
Things are always and not at the same time
If I say "Everyone named Professor Dave is a nice person", and there's only one Professor Dave, is this a universal or particular statement?
universal in nature
👏👍
1st
I was too busy with my winded comment. Haha
killing others is immoral
war involves killing
war is immoral
ALL WAR
🏳️⚧️Celebrate Trans Lives🏳️⚧️
🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢
Stupid bot
@@physicshuman9808
🏳️⚧️ is illogical ideology. The only take away they have from this is universal affirming sentences. Lol
Males have penises.
Bob has a penis.
Bob is therefore a male.
That’s logic.
Women have uteruses.
Pam has a uterus
Therefore pam is a woman.
Illogical
Wheres the tour debate mr dave?
Will upload soon
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thank you :)) can't wait 🤘👍
Dave I just watched you're debate..interview ...with Jesse Lee Peterson and I was shocked how you were being fired at ..you did a good job and there is no way you had to justify yourself at any point in that discussion..I'm disgusted at Jesse for the way he treated you totally disgusted...that was out of order it's not you're fault for the way he sees life and expected you to answer his deluded views on Life...your ok Dave
HEY man check your email plz
HEY man check your email plz
HEY man check your email plz
HEY man check your email plz
HEY man check your email plz