Debates, issues, counterpoints.
So I was in a discussion recently in which I was told I was using 'circular logic' to address my issue.
Going through school I had always been tested with a significantly high vocabulary and understanding there of. So when this was tossed out into the debate I had to stop and think about it for a moment. I knew I didn't understand the full meaning of the term, but I did know my logic was sound and well thought out (and backed with experience on the topic no less). I understood how it was being used (in an effort to debunk my arguement) and I did understand that it was being used to try and show my logic as being flawed.
So, during a lull in our gaming session, I hopped online and decided to google it. Find out what the term truly meant. If for no other reason than to expand my own understanding.
What I found was enlightening
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
In short, I was correct in my assestment of my own arguement and used no form of begging the question or circular reasoning.
Here is the basic logic (without going into details as I don't think people really need to know at this point):
A child (known as Billy in this reference) raised in a moderately sized community is going to school. He has his friends, his school work, knowledge of his hometown, and an understanding where he stands in his life. He might be a kid but he knows what he wants and how to get it in this town and school. It's where he's pretty much grown up at.
Variables: He knows that the school system doesn't support him and doesn't care. And he's seen that this extends pretty darn far up the school board. He's connected to what friends he does have and knows what he can and can't get (like money for video games, places to crash for the night, etc). And he's been self reliant most of his life (was given little to nothing in the beginning and worked for what he has now).
The issue: He isn't done with this education but he is told to (by the head of the housing community in which he lives) move to another, larger city in the same, large county. And if anyone knows anything about Riverside County in CA you'll know what I'm talking about. Friggin huge!
The larger city to which his neighborhood moved to goes at behest of the head of the housing community and packs up the child's things as well.
The truths: Billy is only an acquaintance to most of the neighborhood and in fact the housing community leader has pointedly demanded that the neighborhood not to interact with Billy. Maybe there is something that scares them, maybe it's the way he ties his shoes. The point isn't clear but it's still there and the neighborhood obeys. So the neighborhood, seeing as moving to a larger city is a good idea, pack up and move and forcibly take Billy with.
Ending conclusion: There is nothing to support why Billy would even leave and follow the neighborhood that scorned him. His success was directly tied to what he had established in the previous city and what he himself was able to accomplish. In making this move, he loses more and gains even less in return (unfamilar ground + hostile or indifferent community + ineffective school system + lack of support = illogical move for Billy).
And this is hardly circular logic or reasoning. It's just based purely upon hard facts. In order to obtain circular logic (reasoning) one must make a conclusion based on another conclusion. To state Billy went from a nobody to an excellent student (good grades, position in school, etc) would be to state a fact, not a conclusion. To state that he would make such a bold move would be to say he is trading the evil that he doesn't know for the evil that he does know.
Granted in the above example change is happening no matter what. But to say Billy would follow that which does nothing for him to a location where he has to start over is bizarre at the very least. With the neighborhood gone, he'd stand more of a chance for growth in their wake than going with.
And just to end this off, here is an example of circular logic (more appropriately labeled circular arguement):
Suppose Paul is not lying when he speaks.
Paul is speaking.
Therefore, Paul is telling the truth.
And to break down the above into a summary like this:
Suppose Billy is successful in his home town.
Billy is moving
Therefore Billy will be successful in the new town.
This clearly is not being said. But that is the basis basically for the counter-arguement. Which is a circular arguement.
Was an interesting night of learning none the less.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ok on to game: Game was actually friggin awesome. We've had back to back awesome games and I'm just loving it. The players have been much more responsive lately and really involved. You can almost see them making their moves IC to build towards the future.
We've had some leave and others come to take their place and it just feels all new again. And this isn't me just trying to pump myself up. I've been able to speak to the other players and the feedback has been great.
Even have players seeking to become staff again, which is a good thing. It tells me they like what they see and want to make it better.
We're probably going to have our first IC Bishop here soon too. Big IC step :)
And I guess people like my d20 modern game I'm running too. Kinda flattering because most of the premisce I pulled out of my ass on the first night.
Well thats all for now. Las Mas Frias!
Quote for the week:
"Used to date porno, now you just rent. Do you really wonder where the good times went? Everyone around you sayin' "YOU'RE THE MAN", now you're standin in a mirror sayin "I'M THE MAN!", You let yourself down, you let yourself down, you let yourself down again...."
Going through school I had always been tested with a significantly high vocabulary and understanding there of. So when this was tossed out into the debate I had to stop and think about it for a moment. I knew I didn't understand the full meaning of the term, but I did know my logic was sound and well thought out (and backed with experience on the topic no less). I understood how it was being used (in an effort to debunk my arguement) and I did understand that it was being used to try and show my logic as being flawed.
So, during a lull in our gaming session, I hopped online and decided to google it. Find out what the term truly meant. If for no other reason than to expand my own understanding.
What I found was enlightening
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
In short, I was correct in my assestment of my own arguement and used no form of begging the question or circular reasoning.
Here is the basic logic (without going into details as I don't think people really need to know at this point):
A child (known as Billy in this reference) raised in a moderately sized community is going to school. He has his friends, his school work, knowledge of his hometown, and an understanding where he stands in his life. He might be a kid but he knows what he wants and how to get it in this town and school. It's where he's pretty much grown up at.
Variables: He knows that the school system doesn't support him and doesn't care. And he's seen that this extends pretty darn far up the school board. He's connected to what friends he does have and knows what he can and can't get (like money for video games, places to crash for the night, etc). And he's been self reliant most of his life (was given little to nothing in the beginning and worked for what he has now).
The issue: He isn't done with this education but he is told to (by the head of the housing community in which he lives) move to another, larger city in the same, large county. And if anyone knows anything about Riverside County in CA you'll know what I'm talking about. Friggin huge!
The larger city to which his neighborhood moved to goes at behest of the head of the housing community and packs up the child's things as well.
The truths: Billy is only an acquaintance to most of the neighborhood and in fact the housing community leader has pointedly demanded that the neighborhood not to interact with Billy. Maybe there is something that scares them, maybe it's the way he ties his shoes. The point isn't clear but it's still there and the neighborhood obeys. So the neighborhood, seeing as moving to a larger city is a good idea, pack up and move and forcibly take Billy with.
Ending conclusion: There is nothing to support why Billy would even leave and follow the neighborhood that scorned him. His success was directly tied to what he had established in the previous city and what he himself was able to accomplish. In making this move, he loses more and gains even less in return (unfamilar ground + hostile or indifferent community + ineffective school system + lack of support = illogical move for Billy).
And this is hardly circular logic or reasoning. It's just based purely upon hard facts. In order to obtain circular logic (reasoning) one must make a conclusion based on another conclusion. To state Billy went from a nobody to an excellent student (good grades, position in school, etc) would be to state a fact, not a conclusion. To state that he would make such a bold move would be to say he is trading the evil that he doesn't know for the evil that he does know.
Granted in the above example change is happening no matter what. But to say Billy would follow that which does nothing for him to a location where he has to start over is bizarre at the very least. With the neighborhood gone, he'd stand more of a chance for growth in their wake than going with.
And just to end this off, here is an example of circular logic (more appropriately labeled circular arguement):
Suppose Paul is not lying when he speaks.
Paul is speaking.
Therefore, Paul is telling the truth.
And to break down the above into a summary like this:
Suppose Billy is successful in his home town.
Billy is moving
Therefore Billy will be successful in the new town.
This clearly is not being said. But that is the basis basically for the counter-arguement. Which is a circular arguement.
Was an interesting night of learning none the less.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ok on to game: Game was actually friggin awesome. We've had back to back awesome games and I'm just loving it. The players have been much more responsive lately and really involved. You can almost see them making their moves IC to build towards the future.
We've had some leave and others come to take their place and it just feels all new again. And this isn't me just trying to pump myself up. I've been able to speak to the other players and the feedback has been great.
Even have players seeking to become staff again, which is a good thing. It tells me they like what they see and want to make it better.
We're probably going to have our first IC Bishop here soon too. Big IC step :)
And I guess people like my d20 modern game I'm running too. Kinda flattering because most of the premisce I pulled out of my ass on the first night.
Well thats all for now. Las Mas Frias!
Quote for the week:
"Used to date porno, now you just rent. Do you really wonder where the good times went? Everyone around you sayin' "YOU'RE THE MAN", now you're standin in a mirror sayin "I'M THE MAN!", You let yourself down, you let yourself down, you let yourself down again...."