“If-then’s” generate “choices” or “how to free yourself of other’s causal claims”.
I read a bit of news—mainstream, twitter & FB--and I have this desperate urge to review a bit of logic.
For example, when someone declares "Do it my way or the highway," you don't have to worry. You can reconstruct that statement into:
If it is x, then it must be y.
It is either not x or it is y.
For example:
If he wears brown shorts, then he must be a terrorist.
Either he does not wear brown shorts or he is a terrorist.
Translating the above threat, “Do it my way or the highway,” means “If you don’t do it my way then you must take the highway.” The phrase “do it my way” is negated in the antecedent.
Let’s go further. How about the statement:
“If you believe in me, then you will go to heaven”?
Translates to:
“Either you don’t believe in me or you will go to heaven.”
That’s proper.
But suppose that statement gets warped into:
“If you don’t believe in me then you will go to hell.”
Which translated into “or” form becomes:
“Either you believe in me or you will go to hell.”
Bottom-line: when you get into arguments about choices, watch out for causation type statements as blame that turn out to be dichotomies. Once you see this rule operating, you don't have to take sides.
You are free to mosey along.
I read a bit of news—mainstream, twitter & FB--and I have this desperate urge to review a bit of logic.
For example, when someone declares "Do it my way or the highway," you don't have to worry. You can reconstruct that statement into:
If it is x, then it must be y.
It is either not x or it is y.
For example:
If he wears brown shorts, then he must be a terrorist.
Either he does not wear brown shorts or he is a terrorist.
Translating the above threat, “Do it my way or the highway,” means “If you don’t do it my way then you must take the highway.” The phrase “do it my way” is negated in the antecedent.
Let’s go further. How about the statement:
“If you believe in me, then you will go to heaven”?
Translates to:
“Either you don’t believe in me or you will go to heaven.”
That’s proper.
But suppose that statement gets warped into:
“If you don’t believe in me then you will go to hell.”
Which translated into “or” form becomes:
“Either you believe in me or you will go to hell.”
Bottom-line: when you get into arguments about choices, watch out for causation type statements as blame that turn out to be dichotomies. Once you see this rule operating, you don't have to take sides.
You are free to mosey along.