site banner

2+2 = not what you think

felipec.substack.com

Changing someone's mind is very difficult, that's why I like puzzles most people get wrong: to try to open their mind. Challenging the claim that 2+2 is unequivocally 4 is one of my favorites to get people to reconsider what they think is true with 100% certainty.

-34
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The information in English is limited too. Information is always limited.

"Tomorrow is Monday" has limited information.

Exactly. And because the information is limited, relevant information is missing, and you can't make your argument. If you include the missing information, e.g. by saying "Tomorrow is monday, calendar week [current+1]", it becomes obvious that your claim is false, your example only appears to support your claim because information is omitted. It's evidently possible to include this information. Talking about "limited information" is nothing but a smokescreen to hide your attempt to deceive by strategic omission.

The case where the week ends in Saturday is included.

I was specifically addressing the other case (because "this doesn't change if the end of the week is saturday" is obviously irrelevant when the first part 'this' refers to is wrong.)

You claim the information is available because if the week ends in Sunday "we both know" when the week ends. No, we don't, because I don't. If you want to claim you know when the week ends from the phrase "tomorrow is Monday" go ahead, I do not know.

No, I claim I know when the week ends from the phrase "the week ends in sunday", which was included in your example. You're playing obtuse.

And it doesn't seem to me you are engaging with my argument.

That's because you're not understanding (or pretending to not understand) my critique thereof.

My example was crystal clear in explaining that the day the week ends does not matter in describing what day comes after Sunday.

And this claim is simply not true. It does matter if we are interested in what week it is. Your example doesn't show that because it's just colloquial speech where (relevant for us) information is omitted, which is the opposite of crystal clear.

I showed that by giving a counterexample, where it does matter.

And because the information is limited, relevant information is missing

Information is always missing.

No, I claim I know when the week ends from the phrase "the week ends in sunday", which was included in your example. You're playing obtuse.

No, you are deliberately not engaging with my argument.

Information is always missing.

Not information that is available and relevant to the argument. I already explained that to you. Stop defending your fallacious argument.

No, you are deliberately not engaging with my argument.

To the degree I am, it's because you're trying to set up a red herring.