Theos-Talk Archives (May 2002 Message tt00083)

Thanks Bart.

The statement is comprised of independently true elements, but given out
together these individual elements do not constitute the whole truth,
because, as you say, the statements together are designed to mislead the
thinker into causally linking the two statements and arriving at a
conclusion which is false. The false conclusion being that circumstance 'b'
happened as a result of circumstance 'a'.

Here is another one I remember from Logic class. "If the bough breaks, the
cradle will fall. Given that the cradle has fallen, one may therefore
conclude that the bough has broken." True of False

regards,
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bart Lidofsky" <bartl@sprynet.com>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World 2 questions


> Bill Meredith wrote:
> >
> > ARE WE THERE YET?!
>
> Well, it is probably about time for me to explain my question.
>
> My acquaintance refused to wear a tie to work, and was fired. He was
> fired for bringing office equipment home without permission (after
> having been specifically told NOT to do so). His not wearing a tie had
> nothing to do with it. The sentence was designed to encourage people to
> jump to the conclusion that he was fired BECAUSE he refused to wear a
> tie to work. The sentence, while factually correct, was designed to
> cause people to believe something which was NOT factually correct.
>
> So here's another question (strictly opinion, this time): Was the
> statement "An acquaintance of mine refused to wear a tie to work, and
> was fired" the truth or a lie?
>
> Bart Lidofsky
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>