Went to the ice cream shop with four 8-9 year old's in tow.
Queue up to order. Waiting. Waiting.
Our turn.
First girl orders.
Second girl likewise.
Third orders same as first.
Fourth girl: I am not having ice cream.
Doh?
Me: You don't like ice cream?
FG: I didn't say that; I am not having ice cream.
Me: Okay. Are you allergic?
FG: I am not having.
Me: Do you not like these flavors?
FG: Not having.
Me (really confused): Are you not feeling well?
FG: Not having.
Not having..
Not not liking.
Not physically unable to consume.
Just, simply, not having.
Me: (shrugging shoulders) I guess she doesn't want ice cream.
06 Dec 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSometimes you're just not in the mood.
Went to the ice cream shop with four 8-9 year old's in tow.
Queue up to order. Waiting. Waiting.
Our turn.
First girl orders.
Second girl likewise.
Third orders same as first.
Fourth girl: I am not having ice cream.
Doh?
Me: You don't like ice cream?
FG: I didn't say that; I am not having ice cream.
Me: Okay. Are you allergic?
FG: I am not havi ...[text shortened]... ust, simply, not having.
Me: (shrugging shoulders) I guess she doesn't want ice cream.
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIf FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish. If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision. If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
Went to the ice cream shop with four 8-9 year old's in tow.
Queue up to order. Waiting. Waiting.
Our turn.
First girl orders.
Second girl likewise.
Third orders same as first.
Fourth girl: I am not having ice cream.
Doh?
Me: You don't like ice cream?
FG: I didn't say that; I am not having ice cream.
Me: Okay. Are you allergic?
FG: I am not ha ...[text shortened]... ust, simply, not having.
Me: (shrugging shoulders) I guess she doesn't want ice cream.
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyIf FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish.
If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish. If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision. If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
FG is thinking no such thing. FG realises that her not wanting or liking ice cream is not linked to ice cream not existing. Likewise, ice cream doesn't magically appear just because FG might get a craving for ice cream.
If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision.
No, she wouldn't. FG admits not wanting ice cream and realises that such an admittance doesn't make ice cream disappear. Frankly, FG finds that idea quite absurd.
If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
Luckily, FG sounds like quite a self-reliant young human capable of making her own decisions. FG does not want ice cream and does not feel compelled to eat ice cream against her wishes just because somebody else said she should. Maybe FG had a bit of a stomach ache and she might have vomitted after eating the ice cream. FG had best listen to her own body and mind first before taking orders from others.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish. If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision. If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't
exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision.
If GB thinks that the above is logical, Then FG would like to suggest that GB
doesn't in fact understand the concept and meaning of the word logical.
FG would like to further suggest that GB go take some classes in logic and
reasoning to gain an understanding of logic and reason that might prevent
such misapplications of the concept from happening again.
GF concurs with FG, and would like to add that GB aught to be ashamed that
GB's understanding of logic and reason is less than a 9 yr old's.
😛
GB "it's LOGICAL"
Inigo Montoya "You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means"
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/340/205/4d5.png
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by Great King Rat> If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish".
If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish.
FG is thinking no such thing. FG realises that her not wanting or liking ice cream is not linked to ice cream not existing. Likewise, ice cream doesn't magically appear just because FG might get a craving for ice cream.
If FG said, ...[text shortened]... e ice cream. FG had best listen to her own body and mind first before taking orders from others.
"FG is thinking no such thing. FG realises that her not wanting or liking ice cream is not linked to ice cream not existing. Likewise, ice cream doesn't magically appear just because FG might get a craving for ice cream." -GKR
"If"
> If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision.
"No, she wouldn't. FG admits not wanting ice cream and realises that such an admittance doesn't make ice cream disappear. Frankly, FG finds that idea quite absurd." -GKR
"If"
> If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
"Luckily, FG sounds like quite a self-reliant young human capable of making her own decisions. FG does not want ice cream and does not feel compelled to eat ice cream against her wishes just because somebody else said she should. Maybe FG had a bit of a stomach ache and she might have vomitted after eating the ice cream. FG had best listen to her own body and mind first before taking orders from others." -GKR
"If"
"If", in each instance the Koine 3rd Conditional: FG's thinking; FG said; FG had confidence maybe she did/maybe she didn't.
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by googlefudgeWould you like some Ice Cream right now, googlefudge?If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't
exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision.
If GB thinks that the above is logical, Then FG would like to suggest that GB
doesn't in fact understand the concept and meaning of the word logical.
FG would like to further suggest that GB go ...[text shortened]... ans What You Think It Means"
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/340/205/4d5.png
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
07 Dec 13
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyNo, IF does not get you out of this...
> If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish".
"FG is thinking no such thing. FG realises that her not wanting or liking ice cream is not linked to ice cream not existing. Likewise, ice cream doesn't magically appear just because FG might get a craving for ice cream." -GKR
[b]"If"[/b ...[text shortened]... rd Conditional: FG's thinking; FG said; FG had confidence maybe she did/maybe she didn't.
You made a statement of the form
IF A THEN B.
A being FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste,
Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today"
B being at least she'd be making a logical decision.
A is not logical, thus if FG said A then FG would not be being logical.
Therefore B is not true.
Sticking IF at the front does nothing whatsoever to mitigate that.
I go back to my Inigo Montoya quote.
Originally posted by googlefudgeOriginally posted by googlefudge
No, IF does not get you out of this...
You made a statement of the form
IF [b]A THEN B.
A being FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste,
Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today"
B being at least she'd be making a logical decision.
A is not logical, thus if FG said A then FG would not be bein ...[text shortened]... F at the front does nothing whatsoever to mitigate that.
I go back to my Inigo Montoya quote.[/b]
"No, IF does not get you out of this..."
"Types of Conditional IF Statements"
"The Koine Greek used syntax to express Four completely different concepts. Unfortunately, each concept was translated "if" in the King James Version of the Bible. The 4 types of Conditional IF Clauses are summarized:
1st Class: If - and it is true - [ei - 1st class conditional if]
2nd Class: "If and I recognize it is NOT true"
3rd Class: "if - maybe you will, maybe you won't - [ean + subjunctive mood - 3rd Class Conditional IF]
^ [the type most English speakers would recognize for "if"]
4th Class: "If it is true, I wish it were, but it is not"
Finally, occasionally the writer will use the "debater's technique". That means, for example, he will use a "1st class conditional if" to indicate "if I assume this to be true". The context will lead you to understand this is not what the writer actually believes. Instead, he is using a 1st class condition to say "I assume this is true so I can then prove it is false".
Definitions:
1. A "Conditional Clause" is a statement of supposition. The fulfillment of which is assumed to secure the realization of the potential fact expressed in the companion clause. The First clause gives the supposition and the second clause gives the fulfillment. 2. The clause containing the supposition is called the "Protasis". 3. The clause containing the statement based on the supposition is called "Apodosis". 4. All conditional clauses are categorized on the basis of the attitude they express with reference to reality.
Recognition in the Greek:
a. 1st Class condition - Supposition from the viewpoint of reality. Normally recognized in the Greek by: "ei" plus the indicative in the Protasis IF and it is true. example verse: Luke 4:3: "If you are the Son of God - and I recognize you are - [could be the 1st class of assumption - Satan said this to Jesus maybe to then "prove him wrong", which he then failed to do!]
b. 2nd class condition - Supposition from the viewpoint of unreality - contrary to fact condition. Normally recognized in the Greek by: "ean" in the Protasis plus "oun" in the Apodosis. IF and it is NOT true. example verse: Luke 4:7: "If you will fall down and worship me - but I know you won't" or "ei" plus indicative mood in the Protasis plus a negative in the Apodosis
c. 3rd class condition - The 'more probable' future condition. Normally recognized in the Greek by: "ean" plus the subjunctive in the Protasis IF . . . maybe we will, maybe we won't. example verse: I John 1:9 : "If we confess our sins - maybe we will, maybe we won't . . ."
d. 4th class condition - The 'less probable' future condition. Normally recognized in the Greek by: "ei" plus the optative mood in the Protasis OR "oun" plus the optative mood in the Apodosis IF . . . and I wish it were but it is NOT true. example verse: I Peter 3:14: "But if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, I wish it were TRUE but that is not why you suffer this time." http://syndein.com/Greek_If.htm
googlefudge, I hope this summary enables you to fully understand the Koine Greek 3rd Class Condition.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyOnly in the first of the three examples you posted you are correct because it would indeed be arbitrary and foolish.
> If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish".
"FG is thinking no such thing. FG realises that her not wanting or liking ice cream is not linked to ice cream not existing. Likewise, ice cream doesn't magically appear just because FG might get a craving for ice cream." -GKR
[b]"If"[/b ...[text shortened]... rd Conditional: FG's thinking; FG said; FG had confidence maybe she did/maybe she didn't.
In the second example it clearly wouldn't be a logical decision. Read what googlefudge wrote on this one.
In the third one you are clearly indicating that seeing her parent or whatever as a sort of "authoritah" (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OAmJ4aWXEHc) should make FG decide to have ice cream regardless of whether she wants to.
In all three cases, FG is a young child whose brain is still very much developing, yet she already has the ability of declining ice cream eventhough her surrounding might try to convince her otherwise. FG deserves praise for this, not being made the subject of some weird scenario.
My guess is when FG grows up she may have a lot of free time on Sundays.
Originally posted by Great King Rat"In the second example it clearly wouldn't be a logical decision. Read what googlefudge wrote on this one." -Great King Rat
Only in the first of the three examples you posted you are correct because it would indeed be arbitrary and foolish.
In the second example it clearly wouldn't be a logical decision. Read what googlefudge wrote on this one.
In the third one you are clearly indicating that seeing her parent or whatever as a sort of "authoritah" (http://m.youtube.c ...[text shortened]... some weird scenario.
My guess is when FG grows up she may have a lot of free time on Sundays.
googlefudge's alphabetic coding sometimes poses difficulty in deciphering; besides, I care about what you think.
Originally Posted by googlefudge
"No, IF does not get you out of this...
You made a statement of the form
IF A THEN B.
A being FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste,
Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today"
B being at least she'd be making a logical decision.
A is not logical, thus if FG said A then FG would not be being logical.
Therefore B is not true.
Sticking IF at the front does nothing whatsoever to mitigate that.
I go back to my Inigo Montoya quote."
"In the third one you are clearly indicating that seeing her parent or whatever as a sort of "authoritah" (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OAmJ4aWXEHc) should make FG decide to have ice cream regardless of whether she wants to." -Great King Rat
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
If FG's thinking, "There is no Ice Cream; it doesn't exist for me today" she's being arbitrary and foolish. If FG said, "On the basis of my reasoning and taste, Ice Cream doesn't exist for me today" at least she'd be making a logical decision. If FG had confidence in your authority as the provider of the opportunity to enjoy Ice Cream, she also may have ordered.
FG's volitional free will remains intact in each of three decision process scenarios. I like Blue Bell Natural Vanilla Bean Ice Cream with Smucker's Special Recipe Hot Fudge Topping. Maybe googlefudge will be motivated to Google this fudge topping.