TheInfinite
New member
- Dec 23, 2008
- 2
- 0
- 1
in my philisophy 108 class- intro to logic, our prof gave us two example claims..
1.If tennessee's ncaa football team wins there last game of the season, they will be elgible to play in a bowl game.
Result- They lose the game, yet still make it to a bowl game.
2. If you come to new york, I will help you fix your car.
Result- You do not come to new york, yet i still fix your car.
Now, my prof said even though the first part of each claim is false, the claim as whole is true. now how could this be? if tennessee loses the game and still gets in then that has to be a false statement right? and just because i still fix your car even though you didnt come to new york doesnt make my statement 100% true. what if i didnt have the proper tools in new york to fix your car? then the claim would be false, if you came to neww york he would not of fixed your car
1.If tennessee's ncaa football team wins there last game of the season, they will be elgible to play in a bowl game.
Result- They lose the game, yet still make it to a bowl game.
2. If you come to new york, I will help you fix your car.
Result- You do not come to new york, yet i still fix your car.
Now, my prof said even though the first part of each claim is false, the claim as whole is true. now how could this be? if tennessee loses the game and still gets in then that has to be a false statement right? and just because i still fix your car even though you didnt come to new york doesnt make my statement 100% true. what if i didnt have the proper tools in new york to fix your car? then the claim would be false, if you came to neww york he would not of fixed your car