3 ms·

I just asked chatgpt "All floots are gronks. Some gronks are klorps. Are any floots klorps?" ------ To determine if any floots are klorps, let's analyze the

I just asked chatgpt "All floots are gronks. Some gronks are klorps. Are any floots klorps?" ------ To determine if any floots are klorps, let's analyze the given statements: 1. All floots are gronks. This means every floot falls into the category of gronks. 2. Some gronks are klorps. This means there is an overlap between the set of gronks and the set of klorps. Since all floots are included in the set of gronks and some gronks are klorps, it is possible that some floots are klorps. However, we cannot conclusively say that any floots are klorps without additional information. It is only certain that if there is any overlap between floots and klorps, it is possible, but not guaranteed, that some floots are klorps.

card_zero 2y ago
Huh, almost right. ("possible, but not guaranteed?" it's necessarily true. That whole sentence was a waste of space, and wrong.) Edit: I mean "if there is any overlap", it's necessarily true. I should have quoted the whole thing.
- jdietrich 2y ago
  Nope, ChatGPT was right, the answer is indeterminable. The klorps that are gronks could be a wholly distinct subset to the klorps that are floots. It also correctly evaluates "All gronks are floots. Some gronks are klorps. Are any floots klorps?", to which the answer is definitively yes.
  - card_zero 2y ago
    > The klorps that are gronks could be a wholly distinct subset to the klorps that are floots. So? It's still the case that "if there is any overlap between floots and klorps," it is "guaranteed, that some floots are klorps." It's tautological. Unless there's a way to read "overlap" so that it doesn't mean "some of one category are also in the other category, and vice versa"? Oh, when I said "it's necessarily true" I was refering to this last sentence of the output, not the question posed in the input. Hence we are at cross purposes I think.

card_zero 2y ago

Huh, almost right. ("possible, but not guaranteed?" it's necessarily true. That whole sentence was a waste of space, and wrong.) Edit: I mean "if there is any overlap", it's necessarily true. I should have quoted the whole thing.

jdietrich 2y ago
Nope, ChatGPT was right, the answer is indeterminable. The klorps that are gronks could be a wholly distinct subset to the klorps that are floots. It also correctly evaluates "All gronks are floots. Some gronks are klorps. Are any floots klorps?", to which the answer is definitively yes.
- card_zero 2y ago
  > The klorps that are gronks could be a wholly distinct subset to the klorps that are floots. So? It's still the case that "if there is any overlap between floots and klorps," it is "guaranteed, that some floots are klorps." It's tautological. Unless there's a way to read "overlap" so that it doesn't mean "some of one category are also in the other category, and vice versa"? Oh, when I said "it's necessarily true" I was refering to this last sentence of the output, not the question posed in the input. Hence we are at cross purposes I think.