11 Feb 09
Originally posted by NordlysIn the real world, to predict is to foretell, based on probability. To a logician, to predict is to assert positively, without reservation, that a certain event or result will occur. The evidence cited in the water question is empirical, insufficient for a rigorous proof.
I kind of agree with you. For me, it's a question about how you define "predict", and I would usually use the word differently than the people who wrote the test apparently do (but like you, I correctly second-guessed what they wanted to hear). Also, if a) is true, then it wouldn't be water if an analysis would reveal a different composition; so they should either change a) ar say "every future examination of what seems to be water".
Logic is not subject to interpretation.
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by NordlysTFC? pfffttt, an obviously inferior site😠
http://www.think-logically.co.uk/lt.htm
Kind of fun, although it's quite basic stuff. Judging from the discussions in Debates and Spirituality, I would guess that some people might have problems with some of these...
Edit: Oops, posted in the wrong forum... I hope some mod has mercy and moves it to General.
(Oh, now I see what happened, I had two TFC tabs open. Stupid me. 😳)
