1033: "Formal Logic"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 801
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby rhomboidal » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:05 am UTC

Image

Title Text: Note that this implies you should NOT honk solely because I stopped for a pedestrian and you're behind me.

Hey, I always mind my p's and q's while driving.

User avatar
Eternal Density
Posts: 5590
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:37 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Eternal Density » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:07 am UTC

Reply to this thread IIF you love Formal Logic.
Play the game of Time! castle.chirpingmustard.com Hotdog Vending Supplier But what is this?
In the Marvel vs. DC film-making war, we're all winners.

jpk
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:33 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby jpk » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:14 am UTC

Is he saying that only honkies dig formal logic?

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby ahammel » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:18 am UTC

It also implies:
~(honk & ~you love formal logic)
~(~honk & you love formal logic)
~(honk xor you love formal logic)
(honk & you love formal logic) V (~honk & ~you love formal logic)

But I should stop. I've just had a nightcap and you really shouldn't drink and derive
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

User avatar
Hamsvlekiss
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 3:58 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Hamsvlekiss » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:22 am UTC

ahammel wrote:It also implies:
~(honk & ~you love formal logic)
~(~honk & you love formal logic)
~(honk xor you love formal logic)
(honk & you love formal logic) V (~honk & ~you love formal logic)

But I should stop. I've just had a nightcap and you really shouldn't drink and derive


∑(-x-;)

dreamgear
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:25 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby dreamgear » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:28 am UTC

But, you say I can/should honk if and only if I love formal logic. This doesn't mean I can't honk some more if you stop in the middle of the road (as long as I still love formal logic). No? :P

User avatar
Дерсу Узала
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 4:10 am UTC
Location: Сихотэ-Алинь

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Дерсу Узала » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:38 am UTC

Someone might still honk because the driver stopped for a pedestrian, provided that the honker loves formal logic as well... In other words, I don't think this would be very useful in dissuading over-honking.

Psykar
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 4:32 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Psykar » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:44 am UTC

The roads would be much quieter.
Unless secretly everyone actually *does* love formal logic.

Or maybe people love honking so much that they will come to love formal logic so they can honk again.

jdmulloy
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:14 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby jdmulloy » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:46 am UTC

Why is 'if' spelled 'iff'?

jpk
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:33 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby jpk » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:47 am UTC

Дерсу Узала wrote:Someone might still honk because the driver stopped for a pedestrian, provided that the honker loves formal logic as well... In other words, I don't think this would be very useful in dissuading over-honking.


No, they'd honk just in the case that they are a lover of formal logic, regardless of the presence or absence of pedestrians. Assuming they're the sort of person who obeys bumper stickers, of course.

jpk
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:33 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby jpk » Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:48 am UTC

jdmulloy wrote:Why is 'if' spelled 'iff'?


in logic, "iff" signifies "if and only if".

User avatar
glasnt
Posts: 539
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:18 am UTC
Location: SQUEE!

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby glasnt » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:03 am UTC

I automatically read it as "if and only if", and on second reading thought he made a spelling error.

Woo discrete mathematics coming before english logic!


hi joee.

pensive bosom
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 8:48 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby pensive bosom » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:07 am UTC

Putting an imperative on the left side of a biconditional!? Is there actually a formal logic for that? I never got past Intro.

Turing Machine
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 5:48 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Turing Machine » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:09 am UTC

pensive bosom wrote:Putting an imperative on the left side of a biconditional!? Is there actually a formal logic for that? I never got past Intro.


No, there is not. It's just a joke.

User avatar
Oflick
Posts: 138
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:27 am UTC
Location: Sydney, California, France

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Oflick » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:10 am UTC

Дерсу Узала wrote:Someone might still honk because the driver stopped for a pedestrian, provided that the honker loves formal logic as well... In other words, I don't think this would be very useful in dissuading over-honking.


Perhaps a better bumper sticker would be "honk iff you think whatever I just did was perfectly fine"?

webdude
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:11 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby webdude » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:13 am UTC

I don't like formals; the costumes are illogical. I'd go to a formal iff my date/escort/significant other was worth all that trouble. Tie clasps are fine, but stays, studs and cumbersome bunds? Ugh!

n0etic
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 4:58 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby n0etic » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:31 am UTC

If you love formal logic and you are driving, and you honk iff you love formal logic, you'd be honking your horn the entire time that you drive.

EPAstor
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:17 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby EPAstor » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:38 am UTC

Is there any chance of getting this bumper sticker printed? No, really. I'd buy 5-10 of them.

Every single one of my colleagues needs one. My advisor most of all.

Muz
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:38 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Muz » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:47 am UTC

Okay, so I'll be brave and be the first to say it:

Someone want to explain what formal logic is to those of us too stupid to get the joke?
Author of the Zeus Is Dead: A Monstrously Inconvenient Adventure, the epic comedic fantasy where reality TV heroes slay actual monsters and the Greek gods have their own Twitter feeds!

Website: Michaelgmunz.com Twitter: @TheWriteMunz Facebook: MichaelGMunz

gwillen
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:44 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby gwillen » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:48 am UTC

I have made this into an actual bumper sticker design, but I'm waiting to hear an ok from Randall before I start trying to sell it... I hope he checks his email.

cookrw
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:42 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby cookrw » Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:58 am UTC

Muz wrote:Okay, so I'll be brave and be the first to say it:

Someone want to explain what formal logic is to those of us too stupid to get the joke?

Here is a really good explanation:
http://www.mtnmath.com/whatth/node20.html

I was trolled by this, lol. The bumper sticker really isn't formal logic, and I got a little huffy for a second :)

User avatar
orangedragonfire
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:45 am UTC
Location: It exists. Probably.

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby orangedragonfire » Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:09 am UTC

The problem here would be that people who love formal logic would have to honk all the time. Forever.

User avatar
eligitine
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:12 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby eligitine » Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:16 am UTC

I had to Google iff to understand the comic. That is never a good sign.
I edit an unreasonable amount of times.

User avatar
907Code-G
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:49 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby 907Code-G » Fri Mar 23, 2012 6:52 am UTC

Ah I forgot, xkcd is where I originally got my habit of using xor in conversations and intending or as an inclusive logic statement. :)

Sandor
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:25 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Sandor » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:03 am UTC

orangedragonfire wrote:The problem here would be that people who love formal logic would have to honk all the time. Forever.

I suspect they would grow to hate formal logic after a while, for what it's done to their quality of life. Problem solved.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1110
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Coyne » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:09 am UTC

Honk iff you don't honk.
In all fairness...

jpk
Posts: 607
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:33 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby jpk » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:11 am UTC

Coyne wrote:Honk iff you don't honk.


Gödel is my co-pilot

morric
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:13 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby morric » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:16 am UTC

So if I see this bumper sticker and honk I must assume my significant other sitting in the co-driver's seat smacking me for the implications of my honking.

MartinN
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 8:09 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby MartinN » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:17 am UTC

Also, people who don't like formal logic probably don't understand it either (if you understand it, you like it), so they would honk anyway when you stop for the pedestrian.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5485
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:31 am UTC

There actually are formal imperative (and deontic, which may or may not be the same thing) logics.

And present-tense verbs are ambiguous as to whether they mean occasional or continuous action; if we know that Bob swims, do we know that he always swims, non-stop; or just that he sometimes swims, now and then? How about if Bob lives? Or if he owns something? If he eats? We judge from context because the grammar does not explicitly mark it.

It works just the same with imperatives. If you tell someone to eat green vegetables, are you telling them to always eat green vegetables? Continuously, non-stop? Or, eat green vegetables whenever they eat? Or just, eat green vegetables sometimes, maybe frequently?

So, it-is-imperative-that(you honk <-> you love formal logic) could very well (and contextually, given what honking means, probably does) mean that, if you love formal logic, you should sometimes honk (for instance, now, when you read this sticker), and that if you were for any other reason to honk, you should do so only if you love formal logic.

It does not mean that everyone who loves formal logic should continuously honk so long as they love formal logic.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Proginoskes
Posts: 313
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 7:07 am UTC
Location: Sitting Down

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Proginoskes » Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:08 am UTC

Eternal Density wrote:Reply to this thread IIF you love Formal Logic.


That's IFF.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5485
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:15 am UTC

And for the military logicians out there: IFF iff you identify as friend, not foe.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

ricree
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 1:45 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby ricree » Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:47 am UTC

orangedragonfire wrote:The problem here would be that people who love formal logic would have to honk all the time. Forever.


Not necessarily. Could be existential, in which case they'd just be obligated to honk at least once.

Steroid
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 10:50 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Steroid » Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:50 am UTC

Honk <--> you prefer symbols.

Also, irrespective of the bumper sticker, that is a sweet ass-car.

Azkyroth
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 6:35 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Azkyroth » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:46 am UTC

Nothing like the realization that the light has turned green but the driver ahead of me has decided to finish his/her masturbation session before pulling away from it to bring out that love of syllogisms...

Gud
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 9:44 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Gud » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:52 am UTC

I think making the implication explicit made this significantly less funny.

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby da Doctah » Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:12 am UTC

907Code-G wrote:Ah I forgot, xkcd is where I originally got my habit of using xor in conversations and intending or as an inclusive logic statement. :)

I've had this discussion about whether "or" in common discourse is inclusive or exclusive. Turns out it's both:

Exclusive: Mother to small child: "You may have one cookie or one candy bar before dinner."

Inclusive: Boss to employee: "If you show up to work drunk or naked I'll fire you."

Brian-M
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:31 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Brian-M » Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:15 am UTC

If the goal of this is to discourage people from honking, it wouldn't be very effective. Even assuming that the person behind you understands it and doesn't love formal logic, there is no disincentive for him not to honk. The worst-case outcome for them is that someone might think they love formal logic.

A better sticker for this purpose would be "Honk if you're a racist pedophile rapist". It doesn't matter if they're guilty or innocent, they won't want anyone thinking that they're a racist pedophile guilty of rape, or even a rapist of racist pedophiles.
Last edited by Brian-M on Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:21 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sabreblade
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:44 pm UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby Sabreblade » Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:19 am UTC

EPAstor wrote:Is there any chance of getting this bumper sticker printed? No, really. I'd buy 5-10 of them.

Every single one of my colleagues needs one. My advisor most of all.


Heck, I'd use mine as a door sticker - "Knock IFF..." - it'd help to keep me from being bothered from the applied mathemtician across the hall...
Personally I think this is my favourite comic for a while - certainly made me laugh the loudest.
da Doctah wrote:I've had this discussion about whether "or" in common discourse is inclusive or exclusive. Turns out it's both:

Exclusive: Mother to small child: "You may have one cookie or one candy bar before dinner."

Inclusive: Boss to employee: "If you show up to work drunk or naked I'll fire you."


Ah, I'm sure that turning up both drunk AND naked is fine, I cite the 9th amendment and my right to indecent exposure and public humiliation!

To help clarify on the issue of constant honking couldn't we include some kind of clause:

AND ∀x(Honk(x) → ((Duration(x) < 3seconds) AND ∀y(Honk(y)→(y=x))))

That might help?

EdyScissorhands
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:58 am UTC

Re: 1033: "Formal Logic"

Postby EdyScissorhands » Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:15 am UTC

Regarding constant honking, there's also the possibility that there is feedback from the honking into the love for formal logic. I.E. honking for long enough causes one to no longer love formal logic and thus stop honking.


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 102 guests