Re: What is understanding?

[brian whatcott <inet@INTELLISYS.NET>]

At 12:52 7/12/99 -0400, Sam wrote:
> Brian,
> I believe you have it backwards.
> It is the contrapositive and it is

> If not A, then not B
> Therefore
> If B then A.
....
> Sam Held


Sam, this is a very ancient type of logical fallacy to which I refer.
It's called a formal fallacy - namely, Aristotle's fallacy of the
consequent, which takes two forms: denial of the antecedent, and
affirmation of the consequent.

First form:
If A then B
therefore
if not A then not B

I pointed out the first form of this fallacy.

Later, while nodding at the Carroll persona of Dodgson, Jack Uretsky
offered another example of this formal fallacy and this time it was the
second form, by the way.

Second form:
If A then B
therefore
if B then A

 It was interesting that you called both kinds into question.


brian whatcott <inet@intellisys.net>
Altus OK