DEUS EX MACHINA
Theology is both from Greek: θεός - god; and Greek: λογία - logia, is the scientific study of the nature, causes and effects, extent, control, and explanation of religious behavior in society.
Theology is an interdisciplinary social science, drawing especially upon the research of both psychology and psychiatry, sociology, history, anthropology, and other related disciplines.
Discussions about what positive or negative happens in religions that affect both the single individual and the whole society.
Related links: /v/Religion /v/InternetFightClub
view the rest of the comments →
[–] eagleshigh [S] ago
how are my notes
Put every premise on a numbered line. 1. (A vB) assume the premise is true. 2. When we get to conclusion, indent and write asm (assumption), assume the opposite of the conclusion. ~(~A > B) 3. ~A 2 nif 4. ~B 2 nif when you apply s-rule, cross it out. 5. B 1,3 ds (disjunctive syllogism) to lines one and 3 6. Once you get a contradiction you unindent and write the opposite of the assumption, which it turns out was the conclusion of the argument. If this had worked, we wouldn’t have gotten a contradiction. No counter example, this argument is valid. 2-5 raa
Nif, write left hand side, don’t change anything and write the opposite of other side. When you apply s rule to one prop, it gives two pieces of information. Only thing left, if you have a conditional you can write the left side exactly as is. Conjunction, write the right, opposite of right write the left. Opposite of left, therefore we can write the left hand side which is b. s rules applied to one prop and you get two. I rules you apply I rule to 2 props and you get 1.
Raa stands for redcutio ad absurdum. Lets say we want to prove A. there are all kinds of strategies for proving. We use 1, because it will work every time, the reduction strategy. If we want to prove a, the reduction strategy says asm: ~A. If in assuming ~A, we get a contradiction, then that means that ~A is false. If ~A is def false, A is true. Raa is a strategy by which you assume the opposite of what you want to prove. Show that the opposite of what you want to prove is false, therefore showing it’s true.
~(~A ^ ~B) Therefore (A v B) one premise: 1. ~(~A ^ ~B) 2. Then we indent, indicate an assumption. Write the opposite. 2. Asm: ~(A v B) try to find a way to use an s rule. Negated or, write opposite of left side and right side. 3. ~A 2 nor 4. ~B 2 nor Cross out line 2. Nothing we can do to simplify lines 3 and 4 further. We do have rule for ~ and. Conjunctive syllogism. 2 diff versions. Phi is left and Sai is right. Negated and, match to left you can write the op of the right. Match of the left write op of right. 5. B 1,3 cs no counter example. Our assumption is false, its op is true. 6 (A v B) 2-5 raa left number is line where assumption is made, the right number is where you got the contradiction. Unindent after contradiction. Right hand number is last number of the indent. All of this got us line 6.
[–] [deleted] ago
[–] Crensch-no-education ago (edited ago)
LEAVE @EAGLESHIGH ALONE!
@bojangles
You know who doesn't know any of this stuff? Idiot @Crensch. Also, neither does idiot @bilbo_swaggins
@bojangles @SarMegahhikkitha
But who needs to know LOGIC when Crensch can pull his worldview out of his ass, or suck it from Krauss's penis?
[–] Antiracist10 ago
Why should I help you when you're such a dick to me?