tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post112934129884487969..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: If asked about a conditional statement, would you understand it?Richard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129796968858844182005-10-20T04:29:00.000-04:002005-10-20T04:29:00.000-04:00In general people will accept very poor arguments ...In general people will accept very poor arguments if they already affirm the conclusion. This could be one of these cases, they agree that Bush shouldn't be impeached so they bite the bullet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129616145461534682005-10-18T02:15:00.000-04:002005-10-18T02:15:00.000-04:00haha MP you are such a cynic!haha MP you are such a cynic!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129530544693562352005-10-17T02:29:00.000-04:002005-10-17T02:29:00.000-04:00I think it most likely that 50% of people don't un...I think it most likely that 50% of people don't understand conditionals. People are idiots, and moreover have no experience being held to account for their reasoning.<BR/><BR/>Polls are ludicrously easy to manipulate -- or to be more accurate, you can prove anything through taking something out of context and deliberaturely misinterpreting it. For all we know, the poll was highly contextual, talking about specific events for example.<BR/><BR/>There are many things I understand but "people" don't, and that's just fine because I can justify them. There are also many things I don't understand, which is also fine, because I avoid having strong beliefs on those subjects.<BR/><BR/>The results of the poll are roughly what I would expect.<BR/><BR/>Cheers,<BR/>-MPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129443079093973572005-10-16T02:11:00.000-04:002005-10-16T02:11:00.000-04:00If you have a suggestion, I'm all ears...If you have a suggestion, I'm all ears...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129439452773236572005-10-16T01:10:00.000-04:002005-10-16T01:10:00.000-04:00What, *you* understand conditional statements but ...What, *you* understand conditional statements but "people" do not? Perhaps you need a more charitable interpretation of this result?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129423603723425992005-10-15T20:46:00.000-04:002005-10-15T20:46:00.000-04:00That suggestion that its treated as a conjunction ...That suggestion that its treated as a conjunction is interesting. All you would have to do is repeat the survey with both questions, the conditional, and the conjunction (Bush should be impeached on the basis of his lying to the public). It would be interesting to see if there were very few people who answered yes to the first, but no to the second :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129354913634833592005-10-15T01:41:00.000-04:002005-10-15T01:41:00.000-04:00I think there's a game-theoretical element here as...I think there's a game-theoretical element here as well. Even though I understand that conditional perfectly well, I'd be wary of actually answering the question "correctly" because I know that pollsters and pundits are mostly a bunch of morons like Fertik who'll draw totally invalid inferences from it. Which is, by the way, why I don't answer surveys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129354148411576222005-10-15T01:29:00.000-04:002005-10-15T01:29:00.000-04:00I think either they did not seriously consider the...I think either they did not seriously consider the question or they are just refusing to play the game - they may well see the answer to the question to be a political statement that they dont want to be misused.<BR/>In fact, with this in mind, one might ask why yu would EVER answer a survey purely honestly as opposed to tactically. I many take that into account next time...<BR/><BR/>BUT <BR/>there is also the question "if he lied what exactly was he nature of that lie". Some lies might be more of an issue than others. For example if I thought all politicians lie (a common position) I might be wiling to accept a 'white lie' by a president when the action itself was a thing I suported, or if I felt others were decieved but I was not.<BR/><BR/>I am interested to see if anyone has asked any of those questions though - <BR/><BR/>particularly <BR/>"If Bush is plotting to destroy the universe, then he ought to be stopped."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129352596543783262005-10-15T01:03:00.000-04:002005-10-15T01:03:00.000-04:00Erm, "44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know ...Erm, "44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129352350332225102005-10-15T00:59:00.000-04:002005-10-15T00:59:00.000-04:00It suggests both that Americans don't understand c...It suggests both that Americans don't understand conditionals and that journalists and philosophers alike don't understand polling. 50/50 suggests "I don't know" was not a possible response. 50/50 is consistent with a strongly skewed population of people with strong opinion of the matter and zero understanding of the poll question. It's randomness.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1129344111181671192005-10-14T22:41:00.000-04:002005-10-14T22:41:00.000-04:00I was pretty shocked when I read that, too. Which...I was pretty shocked when I read that, too. Which is worse: the fact that American's don't understand conditionals or the fact that nearly half of Americans rejected the conditional?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com