If Eli_fr is good at logic, this is an awesome thread.

lol, true!

Do you realize that Rome and Berlin are in Europe... for everyone with a rational (logical) mind ?
You guys are trying to prove the opposite and I am the one bad at logic ?

Let me tell you more about what means to have an open mind.
It doesn't mean you are ready to accept any non-sense.
It means you understand you are more than your mind.
Once you realize this fact, your mind starts to open itself, and let your spirit listen to your 5 life senses.
Open your mind means it is closed at some point, but you desire to change, to seek and know the truth, to experience life in the present moment (free of the mind).
Basically, we are ALL borned with an open mind, and "education" (in general) close it as we grow up.
It is true for everyone (but nobody is to blame, that is just the way it is).
Now if you understand it has to change, and desire to change, it will open itself, and let your spirit recieve all the life it should recieve through your 5 life senses (and reflect it).
Check it for yourself : what is it that listens to the thoughts produced by your mind ?

This post was edited by Eti_fr on Nov 25 2012 06:30am

Its so sad that you know so little about logic yet are trying to argue a point using it.

You really need to take a step back because azrad just summed up 500 years worth of research and discovery. While it looks like nonsense, understanding it will help you create cohesive trains of thought that are most definitely true.

For us to explain it, though, would probably take too much time. It's easier if you read up on logic on your own. I'd start by just googling "If A = B and B = C, then A = C."

No one is trying to prove the opposite, and the fact that you think someone is is exactly how we know you're the one that's bad at logic.

So, following your 500 years of non-sense, the following statement would be true ?

If 2+2 =5 then 4+4 = 10 ?

Sorry but while it may seem logic to you, 2+2 is still = 4 and 4+4 still not = 10.
What you call logic is pure non-sense.

Its propositional logic :/ I'll reply to your answers later, thank you for actually trying to address the questions I raised

We can not reach unity and agreement with this kind of non-sense you guys call logic.
This kind of is actually the worst kind of non-sense, it is defiying all kinds of logic.
If you start with a false statement, it is false and that is all... That is true logic.
2+2 = 4, so if you say 2+2 = 5 in the first place, your whole reasonment is wrong and that's it, no need to go further.
But once again we go off-topic, I just answer your posts to keep this thread on the top.
The content of my posts are not helping anyone, I'd rather ignore you and post usefull things but I like to keep this thread on top
All I want here is the truth... Anything that can help people to open their mind, and mankind to unite is welcome.
I will probably ask a mod to close it again so I can open a new clean topic, but I'm afraid you will keep posting judgements and non-sense like Berlin is capitol of Canada...

The reason that none of this makes sense to you, Eti_fr, is that when using propositional logic, you must assume that the initial statement is true. This holds for all logic puzzles like this...so all they're really doing is trying to take cheap shots and fuck with your mind because of your painful lack of logical facilities (formal or informal). Just forget all of this.

A better way of attempting to explain this would be to use a realistic example.

If it rains, I will bring an umbrella.

We assume the above statement is true.

If it rains, I will bring an umbrella.

So we have 4 cases that can happen:

1) It rains and I bring an umbrella
2) It rains and I do not bring an umbrella
3) It does not rain and I bring an umbrella
4) It does not rain and I do not bring an umbrella

Only one of these statements invalidates my initial statement (if it rains, I will bring an umbrella)

Statement 1 clearly does not. It rains, I brought an umbrella. That's exactly what I proposed would happen.
Statement 2 does. It is the opposite of what I said. It rained and I did not bring an umbrella.
Statement 3 and 4 do not invalidate the original proposition. Thus, the original proposition is considered "true" as neither of these cases invalidate what I originally said.

3 and 4 are true because my conditional statement (if x then y) only matters IF X happens. If x doesn't happen, the original statement makes no guarantees over what will happen. It only says what will happen if it DOES rain.

So basically these guys tried to pull a fast one on you. They just made statements like #3 and #4 where the "if" is clearly not true (if bullshit capital, if 2+2=5, if good thread) so it doesn't matter what follows in the logical statement because since the "if" portion is false, the entire statement is true (because the statement does not concern what happens if the "if" is false).