4 ms·

> If your point is that since prisoners are not humanely treated in government run prisons then it is OK for them to be treated the way described in the article

> If your point is that since prisoners are not humanely treated in government run prisons then it is OK for them to be treated the way described in the article Did the GP say that?

skh 8y ago
The "If your point..." is important and should not be left out. I don't understand the point rayiner was making. I made a deduction on what I think he/she was attempting to say and specifically qualified my statement with "if your point...". This is an implicit acknowledgement that I'm guessing and could be wrong. Statements have implications and a part of communication is that both parties end up making assumptions/deductions about what the other party is truly saying. This is why communication is hard. This is especially true for written communication. So it's possible for a person to mean something without explicitly stating so. For instance if I make the two statements: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Then one can deduce that I'm saying Socrates is mortal (and edit on my part here) even though I didn't make that explicit claim. Of course, if I'm illogical - and this frequently happens - I may or may not intend to imply this.
- Stratoscope 8y ago
  You may want to proofread your comment, especially the discussion of the logical fallacy at the end. I think what you wrote is not what you intended to write.
  - skh 8y ago
    I didn't write a logical fallacy at the end or purport to have written one. I think you may have misread my comment. Can you elaborate? I think I wrote exactly what I intended to write. I gave an example of how someone can make statements that logically imply a statement without explicitly having written said statement. EDIT: Yes, I need to change a word. Thank you.
    - Stratoscope 8y ago
      Cool, glad my note was helpful. BTW, the logical fallacy I was referring to is this version (which is definitely not what you wrote or intended, it just came to mind reading it): All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore, Socrates is a man.
- antidesitter 8y ago
  Your example is that of a deductive entailment. There’s no similar deductive entailment for the claim you (possibly) attribute to rayiner from the contents of their post, so I don’t think it’s a valid comparison. You should seriously consider the possibility that your comment did more harm than good by muddling the discussion and deliberately promoting the impression that someone said something you know they didn’t say.

> If your point is that since prisoners are not humanely treated in government run prisons then it is OK for them to be treated the way described in the article Did the GP say that?

skh 8y ago

The "If your point..." is important and should not be left out. I don't understand the point rayiner was making. I made a deduction on what I think he/she was attempting to say and specifically qualified my statement with "if your point...". This is an implicit acknowledgement that I'm guessing and could be wrong. Statements have implications and a part of communication is that both parties end up making assumptions/deductions about what the other party is truly saying. This is why communication is hard. This is especially true for written communication. So it's possible for a person to mean something without explicitly stating so. For instance if I make the two statements: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Then one can deduce that I'm saying Socrates is mortal (and edit on my part here) even though I didn't make that explicit claim. Of course, if I'm illogical - and this frequently happens - I may or may not intend to imply this.

Stratoscope 8y ago
You may want to proofread your comment, especially the discussion of the logical fallacy at the end. I think what you wrote is not what you intended to write.
- skh 8y ago
  I didn't write a logical fallacy at the end or purport to have written one. I think you may have misread my comment. Can you elaborate? I think I wrote exactly what I intended to write. I gave an example of how someone can make statements that logically imply a statement without explicitly having written said statement. EDIT: Yes, I need to change a word. Thank you.
  - Stratoscope 8y ago
    Cool, glad my note was helpful. BTW, the logical fallacy I was referring to is this version (which is definitely not what you wrote or intended, it just came to mind reading it): All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore, Socrates is a man.
antidesitter 8y ago
Your example is that of a deductive entailment. There’s no similar deductive entailment for the claim you (possibly) attribute to rayiner from the contents of their post, so I don’t think it’s a valid comparison. You should seriously consider the possibility that your comment did more harm than good by muddling the discussion and deliberately promoting the impression that someone said something you know they didn’t say.