Ask MetaFilter questions tagged with logic

Blue balls of the mind

Anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 11:17:49 -0800

Argumentative types: how do you avoid becoming this guy? I love debating. It's less about any passionately-held political convictions (I tend to lean conservative/libertarian, but am enough of a reactionary that I can find reasons to disagree with almost anything) and more about the logic of it. Inaccurate statements, poor reasoning and tendentious language get at me like off-key singing, and I get this wave of energy compelling me to point it out and fix it. I'm guessing most naturally pugnacious people will be able to relate to this: the endorphin rush, the elevated heartrate, that slightly bloodthirsty feeling, and the subsequent frustration and depression if you can't engage.

In the few instances where I actually have the opportunity to thrash things out with a willing and competent partner, all's well; win, lose, or draw, I generally end up in excellent humor with myself, my partner, and the world. Unfortunately, I've found that both online and off, most people either don't like arguing or aren't very good at it. Since I do try hard not to be a dick about things, that's an awful lot of debates I just can't have. And I really don't have time to waste composing long recycling-bin-bound posts, baiting my husband, and waking up at 3AM to assemble syllogisms just because I strayed into the wrong part of the blue that evening, or flipped past some ridiculous story on NPR.

I do like being a critical thinker-- probably one of my favorite things about my brain-- but would love it to be a facultative, rather than an obligate, thing. The obvious solutions-- exercise, meditation, repeating, "It's not about logic. You're not going to change anybody's mind."-- just don't help much. (Oddly, alcohol does, but I really don't need the calories.) What else might I do to help dissipate all that excess argumentative energy? Has anyone out there found serenity now?

Weasels are not all bad!

sio42 — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 06:52:05 -0800

Will taking a logic class really help me in talking about things like socieconomic issues that are often emotionally charged? For instance, I was recently discussing an article I had read about the disparity of grade school education between poor urban areas and more affluent suburban areas. One of the terms used was "income inequality", which is a term used to describe the difference in income between the poorest and wealthiest. I was told this was a "weasel word" - that inequality was a weasel word!!!

I was a bit flabbergasted. It's kind of obvious when two things aren't equal. In this instance, the difference between tax bases of schools meant that some schools had recess, art, well-paid teachers, new textbooks, and computers. And others have bathrooms that don't work, bad lunches, overcrowded classrooms etc.

I was then asked if it wasn't the responsiblity of the parents to make sure their children were educated. Everything I said that related to socioeconomic realities was disregarded as not based in reality.

These aren't idiotic people I'm dealing with. Some of them aren't necessarily conservative. But sometimes having conversations about "issues of the day", so to speak, is mind-boggling.

Is there a way to frame socioeconomic issues that doesn't come across as emotional and filled with "weasel words"?

Puzzle Me This

aspo — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:00:27 -0800

I love logic/word puzzles. Where can I find more/better puzzles? I've getting into word puzzles like the stuff you find in Games Magazine, or those PennyPress books. Are there other good periodicals or sources of puzzles I should know about? Preferably offline puzzles, as doing puzzles on the computer just isn't the same. I used to only do crosswords or the purer logic puzzles like the ones nikoli publishes. While there's tons of Sudoku and Kakuro books out there, one big book of the same kind of puzzle gets old. (Crosswords are a different story, but there's no shortage of those.) And after picking up a few of those PennyPress/Dell collections to keep me busy on a plane, I've realized that there's a ton of crossword/acrostic/anagram type word puzzles I've never really given a fair chance.

Are there better sources of puzzles? Those PennyDellPress periodicals are ok, but not fantastic. (And what's the difference between the two magazines anyway? They are published by the same company, are they supposed to be significantly different?) Games magazine is ok, but there's really only a few good puzzles per magazine. Oh, and while I prefer variety is there a good source of American Cryptic Crosswords out there? (I say American because cryptics are already a bit too hard for me, but when all the clues rely on UK puns/references I'd have more fun just making up words that fit the spaces.)

Am I too logical?

schmichael — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:37:09 -0800

How do I talk to people when I am choked by logic? Kind of tricky to explain my dilemma, but I'll give it a shot. A little about my background: I'm an atheist, and I was heavily influenced while growing up by a very very logical, rational-minded person (my stepdad). I've always been told that you should question everything, and that you shouldn't shy away from uncomfortable answers.

I think a lot and I really think that I'm very logical and honest in my way of thinking. Over the last couple of years, I've challenged all of the absolute values, or ideals, that I held. And I've pretty much knocked over every one. I've seen the pros and cons of pretty much every idea or event, the flow of logic and inevitability that sweeps through all of human existence. I can't feel passionate about anything because I can understand why it came to be, why it couldn't help but come to be, and what fundamental problem makes it impossible to solve.

For example, I used to believe that stopping climate change was a worthwhile thing to do, now I see very clearly the chain of events that will make it inevitable - how oil consumption is linked to current population levels and affluence, resulting in increased emissions, and how it isn't just people driving cars but every single facet of modern human life, and the only way to stop it would be for everybody to voluntarily stop eating and buying and reproducing... and I can see through every single vouched solution, because it is so easy when you apply concepts like natural selection, thermodynamics, population ecology...

So now when someone tries to talk to me about climate change - and they're passionate and reaaaally want to do something about it - I basically have to bite my tongue and force myself not to explain why it's pointless. When they talk about how all we need is more windfarms, I can think of a million reasons why windfarms don't work, and even if they did... If I do open my mouth, I think I scare people. And I hate stripping people of their values, because it's so hard for me, I think, well, why shouldn't they believe something if it gives them a sense of purpose?

And it's like this with almost everything. I feel very worried by conversations, because my mind is always working on a very high, abstract level, and I can't connect to people or speak my mind without getting into some very murky territory. I can drown people in shades of gray.

Other than waiting for the irrational thunderbolt of falling in love to come and clear things up for me, what can I do? Does anyone else feel like this? I have a sneaking suspicion that this is linked to my possible hypomania... when I am in a manic-feeling state, I tend to feel that there is something beautiful and essential in the pure act of being alive, so my conversation reflects that. When I am feeling down, this stuff clouds in very heavily.

It's not just when I talk to other people - it hamstrings my sense of purpose in life, in what I am doing, in what I am thinking about. It can be very cruel.

I hope I don't come off as arrogant in this post. This feeling is not one of arrogance - this feeling doesn't inspire scorn in me... just a sad and deflated sense of jealousy for those who are a little simpler, a little more irrational. And I hope that I actually explained myself, because it certainly feels very confusing when I try and lay it down.

Philosophy and critical thinking for younger kids

crapmatic — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:20:17 -0800

What are some good ideas (web resources, books, suggestions, etc) for introducing a 6 to 7 year old child to elements of philosophy, paradoxes, and critical thinking? This is probably too young of an age to actually study the topics directly, but there have to be thought exercises and stories out there that distill the essence of these things in an entertaining or captivating way. I've Googled a bit but found mostly dry lesson-plan type stuff for classes. I know Aesop's Fables is a classic allegory for kids but that focuses mostly on morals.

If P and Q, then...what?

Maisie — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:39:46 -0800

How do I get better at recognizing logical fallacies... ...particularly in conversation? In the midst of conversation I usually find myself responding to the premises or conclusions of an argument by countering with different premises or conclusions rather than noticing that the argument itself is wrong (or weak) to begin with. When I reflect on the conversation later, I can usually see how an argument was flawed, but while it's happening, forget it. This really annoys me.

Has anyone else overcome this problem? If so, how? Is there anything I can read or any exercises I can do to build up this mental muscle?

Help me learn to typeset equations like it was my job. (Why? Because it is.)

nebulawindphone — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:56:56 -0800

I am looking for a math typesetting style guide. By this I don't mean the kind of stylesheet for journal submissions that says "Be sure to use the blah-blah-blah LaTeX package and the XYZ equation environment, and our army of editorial assistants will tie up the loose ends and knock off the rough edges." (Why not? Because my advisor is involved in starting a new journal, and suddenly my labmates and I are that army of editorial assistants.) I am less interested in the technical details of mathematical typesetting. We've got our fonts chosen already, we're committed to using LaTeX and AMSMath which I speak pretty fluently, and we're distributing online so anything having to do with print is Not An Issue. In particular, I am not looking for another LaTeX user's manual — although if the advice I need happens to be buried in one, I'm okay with that. I'm also not particularly interested in simple questions of usage ("bigger parentheses or square brackets?" "~ or ¬ for negation?"), especially since a lot of those boil down to taste and convenience anyway.

I'm more interested in what you might call the visual semantics of it. (F'rinstance: How do you set a long equation so as to reveal its structure quickly and easily to the reader? How can spacing, line breaks, alignment and so on be used to produce that sort of clarity, and what other tricks are there that I'm not thinking of? What about a sequence of equations? A derivation or proof? How do you set a nonstandard symbol — an operator, function, etc. defined by the author;we get this a lot in my field — so that it's clear what its role in the equation is? This isn't a complete list of questions, but it's questions like that that I want to learn how to answer.) Aesthetic details — good spacing, good line breaks and page breaks, all-around symmetry and tidiness — are also important. The goal is to make these thorny and technical articles as easy and joyful to read as I possibly can.

Bonus points for a guide with good advice on the odd situations that come up in formal semantics and mathematical logic. (For instance, I've been unable to find any advice for laying out expressions in lambda calculus, or ones containing multiple quantifiers, and both of those are frequent sources of difficulty here.) But if that's asking too much, then I'm looking for general best practices that I can apply to the edge cases when they come up.

Critical Thinker

jasondigitized — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 06:11:47 -0800

What are some tools and techniques I can use to become a better critical thinker? I asked my friend the other day what he got out of his tier-1 education and he said it taught him how to 'think through problems'. What exactly did his professors teach him about critical thinking? If I memorize the logical fallacies or make a pro's and con's list will I be a better thinker? Is 'going with your gut' an approved tactic in this pursuit? What things do you do to think through a problem and come up with rock solid plans, decisions, and recommendations?

Are the existence of logical paradoxes evidence that logic is not Universal truth?

idyllhands — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:54:45 -0800

Are the existence of logical paradoxes evidence that logic is not Universal truth, or simply symptoms of incomplete or inaccurate semantic systems? I.e., if the Universe is infinite, then everything is possible and every possible scenario happens not only at least once, but an infinite number of times. Within this set of "Everything" is the possibility that "Nothing exists." But obviously something does exist, or I wouldn't be writing this and you wouldn't be reading this. One could say the Universe is not infinite, but then what is outside of it? It would be either Something, or Nothing. And if it is Something what is outside of that Something? If it is Nothing, then how can Something exist "within" it when Nothing has no "within." But this digression would be beside the point of this question. There are other paradoxes out there that have no resolution.

The reason I ask this is that I have recently moved from a "liberal" college town in my state to a rural "conservative" area for a job. I am surrounded by people who easily accept religion as an answer to questions such as this, and am attempting to separate my belief in Logic from their belief in God, and keep coming to holes in my system of thinking which require blind faith, and am trying to reconcile these holes so that my faith in Logic is founded rather than blind.

Please, no responses that I should find God =)

"You can't say people shouldn't steal if you give things away for free!"

benzo8 — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:27:18 -0800

What type of logical fallacy is this: "Giving away x is incompatible with the belief that people shouldn't steal x."

Help Me Move From Pro Tools To Logic Without Losing My Mind!!!

2oh1 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:59:48 -0800

ProAudioFilter! Help a long-time Pro Tools user switch to Logic. My major concern is audio EDITING more than creating. Bonus Question: I have Logic Pro 8 and I'm considering upgrading to 9 if it's worth it. Is it? I've done quite a bit of searching online, but most of what I find is focussed on creating songs with Logic (which makes sense). I'm trying to learn editing. For example, here's a typical project for me: Let's say I'm creating a :30 commercial for an upcoming concert. I already have dry voicework, some sound effects and four songs to be used in the spot, plus various other audio stuff.

I'm really dying here as I try to work in Logic's edit window.

How did you make the leap from Pro Tools to Logic? Where can I find info that will help me make sense of this different way of doing things? I'm really excited about using Logic, but wow am I frustrated too.

∃x∀y∃z[Qx∧(My→Pyx)∧Wz ∧Pzx] ∨ ∃x[Qx∧∀y(My→Pyx)∧∃z(Wz∧Pzx)]?

ed\26h — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 10:28:57 -0800

∃x∀y∃z[Qx∧(My→Pyx)∧Wz ∧Pzx] ∨ ∃x[Qx∧∀y(My→Pyx)∧∃z(Wz∧Pzx)] ? 1. ∃x∀y∃z[Qx∧(My→Pyx)∧Wz ∧Pzx]
2. ∃x[Qx∧∀y(My→Pyx)∧∃z(Wz∧Pzx)]

I’m fairly new to predicate logic. When writing it, I’m naturally drawn to getting all the quantifiers out of the way at the start of the relevant scope (as in 1), as opposed to embedding them within that scope (as in 2). As far as I can tell, 1 and 2 are logically equivalent, and so choosing between them is simply a matter of notational convention, readability, etc. I have some questions:

A: Am I right? Are 1 and 2 logically equivalent? If not, why not?
B: Is there any circumstance where doing things my way would cause a problem?
C: Any further advice/comments?

Thanks in advance!

PS: If needed, here is some further info:

Let’s say our universe/domain is: people and their qualities.
Qx: x is a quality.
Mx: x is a man.
Wx: x is a woman.
Pxy: x has quality y.

Assume I’m trying to say “There exists a person/quality that is a quality and found in every man and found in at least one woman.”

You ate ALL MY PIZZA!

contessa — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 11:58:49 -0800

Is there a mathematical, economic, logical or game-theory name/description for the following scenario? Let's say you have two pairs of people: Pair A and Pair B.

Both pairs are ordering pizza. Pair A will not eat meat toppings, whereas Pair B wants meat toppings. Collectively all four decide to order two pizzas: one with no meat toppings (pizza #1) and one with meat toppings (pizza #2).

When the pizzas arrive, Pair A of course will only eat pizza #1. But Pair B are not committed carnivores; in addition to pizza #2 (which only they prefer) they also want to eat slices from pizza #1.

At the end of the meal, Pair A have had to struggle to get a "fair" share of pizza #1, whereas Pair B have helped themselves to both pizzas.

What's this called? (Besides "being jerks"?)

Looking for a video series. Narrator was male with British accent. All illustrated. Each about 5 to 8 minutes long.

querty — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:22:56 -0800

Looking for a video series. Narrator was male with British accent. All illustrated. Each about 5 to 8 minutes long. I don't remember if I saw one of the videos on Youtube or Dailymotion, but the series of videos were about logic, reasoning, critical thinking, and one of the topics had bits regarding the modern yellow dessert banana introduced by grafting.

Best jump-in-and-go software for n00b composer on a Mac?

hincandenza — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:49:42 -0800

Looking for good composition software on Mac. No actual recorded tracks- it'd be all Kurzweil PC-88 inputted MIDI. Must-haves include fairly easy ability to just jump in and start composin', a music score notation interface, very realistic quality of the instruments (i.e., that my midi inputted keyboard can still sound like a darn good bass guitar), and decent ability to refine the sound quality. [more inside] I ran this question by songsmith extraordinaire cortex and the Music Talk group, and figured- what the heck, lets ask the teeming hordes one last time before I run out and spend $500+.

I've been wanting to start doing some composition again. Often I'll just improvise some random stuff on my (real) piano, and occasionally think "Ooh, that sounds nice!", and then my brain will start looping that, building up, adding in parts. I can't really control that- it just plays without me being able to stop it, but it gets too many instruments coming in to really manage currently. I'd like to take the ideas in my head and get them out in a way that lets me build up the layers quickly while I can remember and control them, and then tinker/edit as needed.

My basic needs as noted in the main question are:

Relatively easy learning curve to at least start crafting music
Notation interface, among others
Good quality sound fonts for fake instruments
Good post-processing when I mature my skillset, to refine and polish the sound to be passably good for MeMu posting

I currently have a Mac Pro 8-way with tons of RAM and a Kurzweil PC-88 with a midi-to-USB connector. I don't like the built-in sounds (the keyboard's probably 10 years old, but sturdy, weighted, full-size) so it'd be strictly a far quicker interface for playing than clicking on a score sheet with my mouse. For what it matters, the type of music I'd be writing would vary highly. It might be some classical or Michael Nyman repetitive bullshit nonsense using chamber instruments one day, and a Muse-inspired sonic wall the next.

From my asking of cortex and then the Music Talk group, it sounds like Logic Studio/Pro is the clear winner at present, largely because of it's notation interface along with competitive editing/sound manipulation features. A notation interface would at least initially be my preferred way of creating music, although with the option to then used to make decent sound adjustments/mixing/spatial creation so that the music doesn't sound like crap (I mean, beyond of course my not-a-lent-assclown compositions being teh suck).

I'm all ready to run down the street to the Apple store on my lunch break and buy Logic Studio- unless someone has an even better suggestion- but my concerns are this:

1) The reviews by users on Apple's own site suggest that Logic 8 (which is still 32-bit) is sluggish, buggy, and not well supported by Apple like previous release. People seem to prefer Logic 7!

2) How does it sound, really? I mean, I won't be a cortex inputting yukele strumming from an actual instrument; everything I use- guitar, bass, violin, piano, drums- will be entirely in software starting from MIDI. My only previous experience with MIDI years ago is "it sounds like total shit". I'm hoping the technology has improved significantly, if not perfectly. :)

Circuit Drawer

iconjack — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:37:04 -0800

Anybody know of any free software that will take my logic equations and make a circuit diagram? As an example, the following describes a circuit with three inputs and three outputs. I'd like to have this automatically drawn up with the usual symbols for and-gates, or-gates, and inverters. Of course the syntax can be anything similar to this.

Inputs X0, X1, X2; outputs Y0, Y1, Y2.

W = ! ( X0∙X1 + X1∙X2 + X2∙X0 )
Z = ! ( X0∙X1∙X2 + (X0 + X1 + X2)∙W )

Y0 = W∙(Z + X1 + X2) + Z∙X1∙X2
Y1 = W∙(Z + X0 + X2) + Z∙X0∙X2
Y2 = W∙(Z + X0 + X1) + Z∙X0∙X1

Adobe Audacity vs Logic Express

treepour — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:04:40 -0800

Switched to Mac, looking for Adobe Audacity replacement. Should I go for Logic Express? I used Audacity primarily for two things (in order priority):

1) Splicing existing recordings together as seamlessly as possible. Here I used the "Echo Chamber" effects quite extensively. These helped create the sense that the musicians stopped playing and then started playing something else -- the ambient echo of the previous section carried on into the next.

2) Severely warping recorded sounds via a variety of filters/effects, combining them together via the multitrack interface, mixing the multiple tracks down to single tracks then continuing the process.

Can I do these kinds of things with Logic Express? Or would I be better off using Audacity via Windows vmware? Learning a new piece of software isn't a problem, I just want to make sure that the software will enable the kinds of things I want to do. Also, any other similarly-priced Mac recommendations for this sort of thing besides Logic Express would be appreciated.

Please help me research human "parity errors".

rwhe — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 19:52:30 -0800

Can anyone point me to literature about conceptual "sign flipping" or "parity errors" and confusion of opposites in humans? I'm interested in material about errors such as subtracting time instead of adding it, or vice versa, when converting local time to GMT; grammatical double negatives; the erroneous expression "I could care less"; confusing left with right when giving directions; and so on. The more general the discussion, the better.

Even suggestions of good keywords would be helpful. Googling "parity error" brings up pages of results about errors in computer RAM.

Yes, I am familiar with the paper called "The Ghost Not", but it comes with a lot of metaphysical luggage I'm happier not to lug.

Thanks!

Name that website: annotated multi-user arguments reaching consensus?

ajp — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 12:25:51 -0800

Name that website: annotated multi-user arguments reaching consensus? I'm sure that I saw a website, many moons ago, that allowed collaborative "arguments", or discussions. It might have been intended as some sort of reconciliation service, allowing multiple people with differences to debate their points.

The aim was to encourage productive, rational discussion, rather than a free-for-all.

Some of the features:

# Paragraphs or sections of text were given a reference number -- like a Biblical verse, or a legal sub-paragraph reference number type of thing.

# Once the parties had agreed on a point, I think the previous cruft of the debate was hidden, leaving only the jointly agreed wording.

# Multiple users could contribute to any discussion.

# The aim of any discussion was to remove anger, aggression, and all that nonsense; and to produce a final written statement or consensus that all parties could agree with.

I might have this all slightly wrong, it's from a fuzzy memory. But I'm sure there's something similar out there. Somewhere. Trawling Google and del.icio.us has not revealed what I'm trying to find.

Much obliged.

Help a poor soul with his truth tables

creasy boy — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:40:29 -0800

I'm confused about Wittgenstein's Tractatus and the truth table for the Sheffer stroke. It's been a minute since I read the Tractatus and I'm trying to get back in with Mounce's introduction. Mounce claims that Wittgenstein uses only one operator, the Sheffer stroke. For him the Sheffer stroke p|q means "neither p nor q". As I understand it, and Wikipedia agrees with me, the Sheffer stroke actually means "not both" and its truth table is:

T T F

T F T

F T T

F F T

Mounce seems to disagree with this. For him Wittgenstein's notation (----- T), which for two propositions p and q would mean (FFFT), "takes us...to the Sheffer stroke -- neither p nor q or -p&-q. Thus:

T T F
F T F
T F F
F F T

I understand how this is the truth table for -p&-q. However, according to Wikipedia, this is the truth table for the Peirce arrow, not the Sheffer stroke. (I understand that you could express the same thing using Sheffer strokes.) But in 5.101 Wittgenstein defines p|q as -p&-q or as (FFFT)(p,q). Does the sign | not mean the Sheffer stroke? Is Wittgenstein himself confusing the Sheffer stroke with the other thing? Or are Wikipedia and my own recollection wrong?

I am not a logician. I am interested in Wittgenstein's views on ethics. All I want to know is: what the fuck operator does he use in the Tractatus, and what is its truth table? I turned to Mounce for clarity and it's just making me winded and dull.

Where's a good logic puzzle discussion forum?

sappidus — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:16:52 -0800

I recently ran across a wonderful logic puzzle, but no solution was provided. I eventually worked out a complete solution myself, but it was rather ugly, and I would like to see if people smarter than me can come up with something more elegant. Are there any good Internet puzzle discussion forums floating around? I note that I already posted the puzzle to The Grey Labyrinth, a wonderful site, but I was looking for other such places.

And I wouldn't want to rob Ask MeFi of the puzzle itself, so I'll put it here. It's a minor modification of a problem from Julian Havil's lovely book, "Impossible?"

("Natural numbers" here means positive integers.)

Someone secretly picks two natural numbers (c and d, not necessarily distinct) and approaches two perfect logicians, A and B. A is told the sum of the two numbers, i.e. the number (c+d). B is told the sum of the squares of the numbers, i.e. the number (c^2+d^2). Both know the nature of the information conveyed but don't know the number given to the other person. The subsequent conversation (referring to the two natural numbers c and d) between them runs as follows:

B: I do not know the numbers.
A: I do not know the numbers.
B: I do not know the numbers.
A: I do not know the numbers.
B: I do not know the numbers.
A: I do not know the numbers.
B: I do not know the numbers, so...
A and B simultaneously: ...we'll never know them.

Why does it take so long for A and B to conclude this?

(The original problem, available here, is superior in that the answer seems to drop out of the sky from nowhere, but I like how my formulation begins in ignorance, ends in ignorance, has a whole lot of ignorance in between, and yet conceals a surprising amount of reasoning.)

Ill Logic

god particle — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 18:39:11 -0800

Logic pro 8 is not working with any audio inputs, what's going on? The built-in mic input on my Macbook registers fine - the meters will show that there is an audio signal coming in and that Logic is detecting it. But if I try using the built-in input with my electric guitar or electric bass, Logic doesn't respond to any audio input. Same goes if I try to use my Presonus Inspire 1394's inputs. It was working fine until maybe a week or two ago. I updated to OSX 10.5.5, but I was having this problem even before then, so I don't think that's causing it.

The Inspire 1394's software mixer shows that there is indeed a signal coming through, so its not the instrument cable or the instruments themselves. For some reason, Logic is just not detecting it, even after I've configured the audio input sources correctly.

What's going on?

How do I convince someone that (S)cience is real?

doppleradar — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 12:50:32 -0800

How do I convince someone Science is real? I've run into a handful of people in the last year who are skeptical that (S)cience is real. Or is any more real/credible/valid than other "belief system."

Their arguments have all had one or a mix of "I don't believe in Science because":
1. It has been wrong before
2. There are still unanswered questions
3. There have been conflicting results on the same topic
4. I read "The Secret"/watched "What The Bleep Do We Know"/etc., and think that pairing pseudo-science with vaguely related Scientific concepts makes it all equally true.
6. Science is accepted because people are brainwashed by authority and not because it is true.
5. Any of the above reasons why Science is "wrong" proves my hypothesis right.
6. If it works for me, it is true.

I don't begrudge anyone their belief system, but am a little overwhelmed with the sheer baseness of why there is a distinction between Belief and Fact. It seems like there should be an easier way to explain it all than having to get into some long diatribe on the history and philosophy of Scientific thought.

So, hivemind, what is the most basic, and most respectful way to explain why (S)cience is "real?"

That's not logical

god particle — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:31:52 -0800

In Logic 8, when I try to import an audio (aif) file exported from Ableton Live, Logic slows down the audio file significantly. The track from Ableton Live was at 160bpm, and even when I set Logic's project tempo to 160bpm, the audio file plays back at less than half that tempo. I feel like I'm overlooking something really obvious, but I'm having trouble finding the solution anywhere. How do I import the audio file without Logic messing things up?

Logical quizzes about logic

Solomon — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 13:53:34 -0800

I recall seeing a quiz on the internet some time ago, that asked you about 20 questions, and then told you how logical your thought processes were, and told you why. Do you know where I can find this quiz? This was a professional looking website, with well thought out questions, and responses to them. It wasn't something like Quizilla, but more like the Myers-Briggs tests.

I seem to recall it asked the same question twice a few times, with the intent of "catching you out". One of the questions was about Hitler.