dsgrue3 said:
1) Claim 2) Premises 3) Deductions 4) Conclusion Claim is what we're trying to prove. Premises - the knowledge base. Conclusion should match Claim. I (Falsely) used Premise as Claim. I was incorrect. I've been out of University for a couple years, I'm rusty, but the process remains the same despite my improper usage of the word. You still haven't addressed the entire point though, which is your strawman. It wasn't intentional, but it was there. Agree?
@Other dude, wikipedia isn't credible. End of. Again, you'll learn when you get to high school. |
I'm going to be complete honest here and no offense but just truth is intended with the following. I think the problem is that you're autistic and that you can't accept that when used correctly wiki can be a useful tool due to the symptom of restricted behaviour because no matter what reasoning I present to you, you don't actually logically refute it, you just repeat yourself like a stuck record. Such behaviour leaves me to think that you are limited in your scope for accepting new ideas to such a degree that it is actually a debilitation on your behalf. If you could shed some light on this idea that would be appreciated as I cannot see a need in furthering a point if a party has a literal inability to accept new viewpoints.
