What are you taking this semester?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher
Hello strawman, we meet again.

My issue was with you saying people take philosophy because they like it, even it's not necessarily the case. Only a handful of kids in my entire Philosophy of Logic class wanted to take it. It was a course requirement for the CompSci and EE/CE kids.

And I was talking about the courses I've taught in. Why don't you complain to the Comp Sci programme directors if you think it's useless for your degree?

So saying because people keep taking them doesn't necessarily mean they want to take them. Basic stuff, but something you try to make excessively complicated so you can bury the argument in a semantic mess.

Oh Christ!

Not all people who take philosophy courses take them because they like them or think they'll be interested, but most do and all in all but one course I've taught. Good enough?

But go ahead, keep it up with the strawman, you're getting real good at that now.

"Be silent! Keep your forked tongue behind your teeth. I have not passed through fire and death to bandy gird words with a witless worm!"

[Asher]

Originally posted by Agathon
And I was talking about the courses I've taught in. Why don't you complain to the Comp Sci programme directors if you think it's useless for your degree?

I emailed the dean last year, not saying it was useless, but redundant for the useful things.

1. Boolean logic -- this was like 1st semester, 1st year.
2. Proofs -- covered in much more detail and much more relevant ways in discrete mathematics
3. Turing Machines -- covered in much more detail, and in a way to be useful, in a CS class that was taken concurrently



I don't think he cares, though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Only a handful of kids in my entire Philosophy of Logic class wanted to take it. It was a course requirement for the CompSci and EE/CE kids.

Imagine that... teaching Compsci kids about Logic .

[Asher]

I know, can you believe it?

The only people who found that course hard were the Philosophy kids. Logic is apparently a foreign concept to them.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm pretty sure the Philosophy types could run circles around you in logic... Hell, Agathon seems to be doing so right now .

[Asher]

Agathon didn't use logic whatsoever. Do you know what logic is?

Compare GePap and Agathon's arguments carefully.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes, I know what logic is. My 'A' in Intro to Logic speaks for itself .

And yes, Agathon has shown more logic than you. I don't recall comparing GePap to either of you, however, in my prior post .

[Asher]

Who doesn't get an A in Intro to Logic? It's a GPA booster.

And which part of Agathon's argument contains more logic? How he defined University in his own way, then based an argument off it, and told me to look up various charters if I wanted to confirm it?

Or was it the constant barrage of strawmen?

Or perhaps the "it is fact because whoever disagrees is a moron" approach?

I'm not sure you really understand logic either.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Who doesn't get an A in Intro to Logic?

Plenty of people, including the people I studied with.

And which part of Agathon's argument contains more logic? How he defined University in his own way, then based an argument off it, and told me to look up various charters if I wanted to confirm it?

What defining of university in 'his own way'. His definition of university is 100% correct. It is a place for a free flow of ideas and curiousity. This is what it has meant for thousands of years.

I'm not sure you really understand logic either.

Ah yes, your common refrain when you've lost the argument .

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Plenty of people, including the people I studied with.

All of the CS people I knew got As. The average was a B in the class...

What defining of university in 'his own way'. His definition of university is 100% correct. It is a place for a free flow of ideas and curiousity. This is what it has meant for thousands of years.

It doesn't mean a university is not a university if it doesn't teach, say, Philosophy.

In fact, it is a much more general term, as evidenced by every definition of the word you can find.

And the fact remains that he hasn't substantiated his claim, as you just have. You've both now just said "well that's how it is, duh", when that's not necessarily the case until you prove it.

No, no, you're both obviously fairly inept with logic if you don't get that...

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Asher

I emailed the dean last year, not saying it was useless, but redundant for the useful things....
I don't think he cares, though.

Of course not! Why would he bother to placate you, who won't be at that school but a couple+ years, at the political expense of having the entire Humanities department calling for his job?

Sometimes your expectation of complete "rationality" and "logic" from other people cracks me up.

[Elok]

Ah, Asher, they haven't explained their belief that the world is not ruled by purple winged monkeys from Saturn either. The reason is that they find the fact to be so self-evident as to require no explanation. If you do not see it that way, that doesn't necessarily make either of you stupid or incapable of logic, but it is a sign of differences in your individual perception for some reason. I think the key to this discussion would be to take it slowly, point by point, from the beginning. Or just say screw it and walk away, which it seems you're both about to do.