>>2729932

Re: PADDOCK LV ^

>>2730101

so is that p = premise

and you are saying that the premise to a question can be modified as the opposite of the premise will = opposite of the question?

and then that opposite of the question will yield an opposite premise?

Contra root word counter… so its a way of displaying or discovering a valid argument by means of seeing if the exact opposite of the premise would match with exact opposite question?

*Ahhh I didnt get that quite right, nice first try thought:

Heres the real form.

If Q has Q access than he is real

Q does not have Q access

Q is not real.

If Ebot does not shower he smells

Ebot smells

Ebot doesnt shower

… ever?

Just having some fun.

I only got to Aristotle and first part A E I O and the common fallacies…

I entertain the thought that you might answer constructively out of sheer boredom.

>>2730379

lol yeah right

>>2730417

godd@#$%

dont tell me how the movie ends!

>>2730417

ouch 5:40 is rough

>>2730423

everything is an exciting

triple

cross

TRUST you MUST

>>2730507

GW

Ebot

>>2730451

well

cleverly either interpretation works …

Trust

Fund.

>>2730653

oh god, that would be

fantastic; I dont think they can do that.

>>2730658

eh… I prefer the 40000 ft view on that one.

lesson learned

>>2730747

yes but its poof by inference with a valid argument.

replace middle sentence with Q has Q access

but then its closer to your basic argument… er syllogism if I remember right.

you know this so…. ?