On Coursework

{I am only doing this because I wish someone else would.}

3.3 Modus Ponens made so much more sense to me after we "unpacked" almost every exercise in class yesterday. That is, of course, until I redid every exercise.  I'm happy to report that I didn't make as many mistakes in round 2 as I did in round 1, but I still made a few.

I was terribly puzzled by 4.1, though not until I went to check my answers against the answer key. Somehow I'd managed to misplace my bookmark, a helpful, information-packed pamphlet titled, "A Philosophy Toolkit," just before the exercises of chapter 6.1.  So I now have negations, contradictories, and disjunctions swirling around in an already confused brain.

I only missed the double negation in the symbolizing exercises. Only one of my translations into, "a readable English statement," matched Arthur's in the key.

Here are my translations:

2b) Montesquieu is to be believed, even though there is no God, we must still venerate justice.
              B -> ( ~G-> V)

c) Do not believe Montesquieu, venerate justice because there is no God.
             ~B-> (V-> ~G)

d) There is a God, do not believe Montesquieu.
                G & ~ B

e) We must venerate justice and believe Montesquieu, there is no God.
                (V & G) -> ~G

The assignment was for a readable statement, not one that really makes sense, right? Anyway, it was terribly difficult to put this up for review now that I have seen Arthur's answers...

I am still trying to unravel why "No politicians are corrupt." and "All politicians are corrupt." aren't contradictory.
As far as I can tell, the truth of p is incompatible with the truth of q... Perhaps I misunderstand.

FYI: I like to get in the classroom about half an hour before class, so if anyone else wants to chatter about this stuff informally, that is a good time for me.

Argument Sample

"[T]he proliferation of SUVs has created huge problems (C). Their safe image is an illusion. They roll over too easily (p1), killing and injuring occupants at an alarming rate (p2), and they are dangerous to other road users (p3 /sub C) , inflicting catastrophic damage to cars that they hit (p4) and posing a lethal threat to pedestrians (p5). Their “green” image is also a mirage, because they contribute far more than cars to smog and global warming (p6). Their gas-guzzling designs increase American dependence on imported oil at a time when anti-American sentiment is prevalent in the Middle East (p7)."

Keith Bradsher, High and Mighty: SUVs-The World’s Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got That Way

Found in: Lunsford, Andrea. Ruszkiewicz, John. Walters, Keith. Everything's an Argument with readings. 2004. Bedford/St. Martin’s. Boston New York.  Pg 27-28

Standard form:

SUVs roll over too easily.

SUV roll overs kill and injure at an alarming rate.

SUVs are dangerous to other road users.

SUVs inflict catastrophic damage to cars they hit.

SUVs pose a lethal threat to pedestrians.

SUV's contribute far more than cars to smog and global warming.

Their gas-guzzling designs increase American dependence on imported oil.

The proliferation of SUVs has created huge problems.

Grudgingly

So. I've stumbled in and created this blog. I have no clue what I am doing, and I'm bound to make loads of mistakes.
Sounds like I'm in yet another class full of people who process information in a way that is foreign to me. I look forward to getting better acquainted with all of you.