Just wondering about the first two lines of 林俊杰's 曹操...
First line:
不是英雄, 不论三国
Since a conditional statement is equivalent to the converse of its inverse, it can therefore be rewritten as such:
P1: 论三国的都是英雄.
Second line:
若是英雄怎么能不懂寂寞
This is clearly a rhethorical question, which means:
P2: 英雄都是寂寞的.
We are thus forced to conclude that:
C: 论三国的都是寂寞的.
Just sayin'.
P1 is not correct. while it is true that conditional statment can be rewitten in the inverse or converse form, it does not means that that form is true or hold up to other hypothetical tests (i.e. literature meaning) so which means there can be a scenario where 论三国 but not 英雄.
ReplyDeleteLikewise for P2 the conclusion should not be 都是寂寞的 else well because it means they had been through loneliness (i.e they understand but doesn't mean they are). :p
just saying too. hahaha..
I agree that the converse or inverse of a conditional statement are also conditional statements that are, in general, not equivalent to the original conditional statement. However, if we take the converse and inverse of a conditional statement, the resulting conditional statement is always equivalent to the original statement. So P1 is correct.
ReplyDeleteBut I admit that my P2 is wrong. So my conclusion is still wrong(but has to be modified slightly).
oh wait, do you mean that my treatment of P1 is wrong or that P1 itself is false?
ReplyDelete