A wise Vulcan once said “Logic is the begining of wisdom not the end”, but enough about that weirdo. Take the 15-question Arm Chair Logic Test to find out how logical you are.
Categories
Onelargeprawn
A wise Vulcan once said “Logic is the begining of wisdom not the end”, but enough about that weirdo. Take the 15-question Arm Chair Logic Test to find out how logical you are.
15 replies on “Arm-chair Logic – Take The Test”
Oh bummer, and here I thought I was logical… I scored 33% LOL
It’s not as easy as one would think. Don’t worry though, I put the “Lo” in Logic ;)
woohoo 87% :D
Nice efforts chaps. I got 82% which truly surprised me.
11…73%
I got 12 right….80%….gaming hasn’t fried my brain just yet…
Geez am I stupid or something? hahaha
Look at all these high scores… you okes rock man!
Lol, I got 40% :o
80% Baby!!! Got question 2, 12 & 14 wrong. Got me thinking for a good 2 minutes for some of the questions before I could lock it in.
Ah I got 9 right. 80% :)
93%! That was quite fun. Cool find Prawn
Only got the “Murder” one wrong. Based on the arguments posted, and only considering those, it should be “Valid”, but alas.
87%… got the last two wrong :(
I think the brain starts to fry after a while :)
93%. I knew I was logical.
Mary, if the only one you missed was the last one then you win 100%… lol
He got number 15 wrong… spoiler below!
Arm-Chair-Guy says this:
Answer 15.
a) Water is a molecule composed of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom.
b) Every observation or examination by microscope has confirmed this.
Conclusion
Therefore we can predict that every future examination of water will reveal the same chemical composition.
Invalid. The syllogism itself is invalid and can only be considered as a strong inductive argument and not deductive. It is the ‘we can predict’ part of the conclusion which comes from nowhere, so the argument is not strictly formal. There is an ongoing debate within philosophical circles as to whether water must conform to the molecule H2O. Some argue that it is logically possible for a substance to appear exactly as water and yet still be of a different chemical composition.
I say this:
Whatever! The conclusion is proven true by contradiction. If some future observation shows a water molecule that is not H2O then premise A is wrong, but premise A is never wrong for the purposes of deciding if the conclusion is valid. QED