1st he is saying laws do not follow logic. ie You can get an abortion without parental consent but you can not go into a rehab for drugs without consent.

2nd Look at Stephen Hawking I’m simplifying but he basically decided that information could be destroyed in black holes (they would disappear over time) and told the rest of the community to prove him wrong. Which they did. (well sort of)

Also if you are to convince someone that they are wrong and that Vulcans don’t exist well then you will need the evidence as the burden is on you. What are they going to do magically wake up and say Vulcans don’t exist.

Saying they have to prove it is a smug attitude that in no way is practical in reality, If you want AIDS to stop in Africa you can’t just hand people condoms you have to convince them they are needed.

People believe some vaccines cause autism, Saying it’s up to them to prove it is stupid, they need to be informed because their children need those vaccines.

And guess what there is a possibility, no matter how small that Vulcans might exist.

Your analogy with math is completely wrong, It’s more like saying that you have an identical twin some where on earth. The only evidence one way or the other “to you” is going to be a probability. And that is not YES or NO. So you can not say 100% that you do not have a twin. Hell if you really want to get into it you can’t say for 100% that I exist. All you can do is say it is not very likely.

Now onto Argument and Persuasion, fallacies do not make people wrong. All they do is strip credibility where the fallacy is.

Here are some common fallacies, which I assure you lawyers do use. You are even guilty of some.(As am I) Hasty Generalization, Faulty Use of Authority, Post Hoc or Doubtful Cause, False Analogy, Ad Hominem, False Dilemma, Slippery Slope, Begging the Question, Straw Man.

“Just because you don't have evidence that something does exist that does not mean that you have evidence that it does not exist.”

Now this statement in it’s self is logic.

The Argument form Ignorance fallacy is more in absolutes.

"You can't prove God doesn't exist, so God exists"
"You can't prove God does exist, so God doesn't exist"

See there is a declaration of YES or NO not maybe.

Now to Burden of proof, well this has many contexts. But the bottom line is the burden of proof is always going to be on the person who wants to change others mind. So if our Vulcan guy is trying to convince you then the burden of proof is on him. But if your trying to convince him he’s wrong then its on you. And if both then both. That’s the reality no matter what Websters says.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TWO TALKING ABOUT~!

Hmmm...but what if we make hole into Hole; as in a proper noun hole. And the 'hole' is only a 'Hole' if it fits those specific dimensions? Then, we could dig half of a Hole, using the method I explained above.

I think this logic may need some work; this time I'm attempting to tackle the uncomfortably abstract subject of half-hole digging while high, so there's probably some flaws in my logic somewhere.

Hmmm, or what about this? What if we adopt a paradoxical perspective on the the hole's status as a hole. A hole of any dimensions is a hole, yes. But it is also, simultaneously, half of another nonexistent, but potential hole (one which would be, obviously, twice its dimensions). So, yes, it is a hole, but it is also half of a hole...just a different hole; one that does not, but could, exist. It IS a hole, but it's also half of a hole.

...Okay, I just read over my post and confused myself. I'm way too hight to be attempting this kind of abstract reasoning. I'm out.

Hole-e-SHIT!  I'm laughing my ass off over here.  blaydcor, you just made me a fan of yours!

Okay, I'm just playing around with the search function, but I noticed this thread, and I've actually stumbled on some of the issue here with bladycor's arguments.

essentially, what he's trying to describe is a task, not of digging half A hole, but of digging half THE hole.

Were a task given to you to dig a hole given by specified parameters, it become THE hole, not just A hole. Were you to start digging, with the intent of digging a 4 x 4 foot hole 2 feet deep, but then you stopped at a depth of one foot, you would have indeed completely dug a generic hole, however, that hole is only half of THE hole specified by the parameters given.

so digging half of A hole(random hole that only needs to meet teh conditions of being a hole) is impossible, but digging half of THE hole(a hole with specific dimensions intended upon initiating the digging process) is entirely possible.

Yes, I think about this type of stuff.


Shut up.

Whoa, there's a thread at VGC called "half naked" and Rubang's not in it?

FIXED.

I read half-way through this thread and it hurt my brain.

I'm going to say people say half naked because people focus on the half naked part. Not the half clothed part.

Also. Vulcans might exist.

Hell, the fucking Klingon Language exists. It shouldn't but it does. More people speak it fluenently then Latin.

For all i know there are some aliens out their who received broadcasts of Star Trek and were so impressed they transformed their entire race into Vulcans.

Or that a race of vulcans just evolved.

It's possible. Is it probable? What do I look like a Mathematician? How the hell would someone even come up with a proper probablility on that? We don't even know enough about the universe to know that kind of thing. We assume it's really inprobable but who really knows.

I mean... look at Hernando Cortez's arrival to the Aztec Empire.  Weird coincidences just happen. 

I really don't get how anyone can be 100% on anything. Including the really obvious "I exist" type questions. But then again I was a born skeptic.