Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

BR Logic translation

Giant PandaGiant Panda Alum Member
in General 274 karma
Hi guys,

A small question about a translation.

Sentence: Human are always equally content with two things of equal usefulness.

We know from rule 1, what follows always is a NC.

So doesn't it supposedly translate to: Equally Content-->Equal usefulness

This is actually from: https://7sage.com/lesson/five-fingers-six-phalanges-strengthen-question/

But I got it the opposite way.

Care to shine some lights?

Thanks,

Panda
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • Nanchito-1-1Nanchito-1-1 Alum Member
    edited July 2016 1762 karma
    Strengthen question, the biologist is talking about how humans have 5 fingers now because we evolved from something else that had five fingers, and how the configuration is no more or less useful then any other number. If we would have evolved from something with a different configuration we'd be equally content with that figuration. Really? is it just as useful? What about aesthetically pleasing? What if instead of pinky up, it'd be 2d ring finger up, it's not the same, and which ring finger would you even put your engagement ring on?.... but I digress. The assumption is that if it's equally useful (despite the different number of fingers) then we'd be equally content.

    a. So what if everyone is content. It does not help strengthen the conclusion that we'd be the just as content if we had more or less fingers.
    b. This one is backwards. Ec-->eu
    c. eu --> ec. Bingo.
    d. this one tells us that we perceive usefulness, but usefulness is relative... that does not help our argument that we'd be just as content.
    e. who cares.

    I hope that helps.
  • Nanchito-1-1Nanchito-1-1 Alum Member
    1762 karma
    Also, for b, unequal usefulness? I wouldn't know.
Sign In or Register to comment.