1. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 01:19
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
  2. weedhopper
    Joined
    25 Jul '07
    Moves
    8062
    30 Sep '09 02:01
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    4. We can both be right, if right/wrong, good/evil, etc. are relative.
  3. Joined
    07 Mar '09
    Moves
    18221
    30 Sep '09 02:06
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    Or we can more more about each other than for either of us to insist on being right (especially when honest opinions differ and no incontrovertible proof can be offered.)
  4. Donationbbarr
    Chief Justice
    Center of Contention
    Joined
    14 Jun '02
    Moves
    17381
    30 Sep '09 04:15
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    (3) only holds if the debate concerns propositions that are mutually incompatible. Perhaps you intended 'debate' to refer to only cases of this sort, but often what appear to be debates are not of this sort. Often people equivocate upon or poorly understand crucial terms in their discussions, and when clarity is achieved the putative debate is dispelled.
  5. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    30 Sep '09 11:03
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    It can't be wrong if it feels so right? LOL.
  6. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 11:15
    Originally posted by bbarr
    (3) only holds if the debate concerns propositions that are mutually incompatible. Perhaps you intended 'debate' to refer to only cases of this sort, but often what appear to be debates are not of this sort. Often people equivocate upon or poorly understand crucial terms in their discussions, and when clarity is achieved the putative debate is dispelled.
    Then, when there are mutually incompatible propositions, one is right or one is wrong, or both can be wrong, but both can't be right.

    Then this logic supports the case for absolutes.
  7. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 11:18
    Originally posted by whodey
    It can't be wrong if it feels so right? LOL.
    I've been there. With disastrous results. One can never trust ones feelings. 😉
  8. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91589
    30 Sep '09 11:30
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    Even 'wrong' things can be true. (The 'wrong' thing may play a part in anothers' situation,and help them out-all points of view can only be seen by god)
  9. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    30 Sep '09 11:48
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    Even 'wrong' things can be true. (The 'wrong' thing may play a part in anothers' situation,and help them out-all points of view can only be seen by god)
    I think the options may be better expressed as:

    In any debate:

    1. Both opinions can be incorrect.

    2. One opinion can be incorrect.

    3. It can never be the case that two conflicting opinions can be correct.

    where incorrect==wrong==false
    and correct==right==true

    but that probably still doesn't unambiguously describe the options!

    --- Penguin.
  10. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 12:02
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    Even 'wrong' things can be true. (The 'wrong' thing may play a part in anothers' situation,and help them out-all points of view can only be seen by god)
    What god?
  11. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91589
    30 Sep '09 12:35
    Originally posted by josephw
    What god?
    The feminine-passive-sound-light vibration that permeates our lives and gives us strength...SSSHhhh. (There is no god-everyone has already repeatedly established that!)
  12. Joined
    07 Mar '09
    Moves
    18221
    30 Sep '09 12:42
    Originally posted by josephw
    Then, when there are mutually incompatible propositions, one is right or one is wrong, or both can be wrong, but both can't be right.

    Then this logic supports the case for absolutes.
    Yep - too bad actual human life and real world problems can't be reduced to logical propositions because of incomplete or disputable information. Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge. Outside of the chessboard I don't know of many situations like that.
  13. Standard memberHand of Hecate
    Merciless Vagabond
    Deep in it.
    Joined
    08 Feb '05
    Moves
    14614
    30 Sep '09 17:11
    Originally posted by josephw
    In any debate:

    1. We can both be wrong.

    2. One of us is wrong.

    3. We can't both be right.


    Does anyone see any other option(s)?
    4. One of us (you) can be a poopy head and hence wrong QED.
  14. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 23:00
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    The feminine-passive-sound-light vibration that permeates our lives and gives us strength...SSSHhhh. (There is no god-everyone has already repeatedly established that!)
    I sure like the sound of 'feminine-passive-sound-light vibration', but what is it?
  15. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    30 Sep '09 23:04
    Originally posted by TerrierJack
    Yep - too bad actual human life and real world problems can't be reduced to logical propositions because of incomplete or disputable information. Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge. Outside of the chessboard I don't know of many situations like that.
    "Logic always works in a situation where you possess perfect knowledge."

    Care to describe a situation where one possesses perfect knowledge?
Back to Top