This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Argument from ignorance article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 21 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This edit introduced a level of abstraction that made the intro more difficult to read. The previous version was simpler and more direct, not broken, and hence not in need of repair. I have now twice returned it to status quo ante. Please discuss here instead of edit warring. Just plain Bill ( talk) 23:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Claiming "This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false." is a clear violation of the Law of the Excluded Middle.
In other words, the possibilities can only be true or false. Insufficient information is not one of them. Magnetic Flux ( talk) 03:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
There may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or falseis short for
There may have been an insufficient investigation to either prove that the proposition is true or prove that the proposition is false. To assume that the meaning is
There may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is (either true or false)and that the proposition is a strictly boolean one with no fuzzy borders in the words is to assume that the writer is an idiot. Don't do that. And don't edit-war. -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 11:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
Lack of imagination has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 18 § Lack of imagination until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Argument from ignorance article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 21 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This edit introduced a level of abstraction that made the intro more difficult to read. The previous version was simpler and more direct, not broken, and hence not in need of repair. I have now twice returned it to status quo ante. Please discuss here instead of edit warring. Just plain Bill ( talk) 23:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Claiming "This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false." is a clear violation of the Law of the Excluded Middle.
In other words, the possibilities can only be true or false. Insufficient information is not one of them. Magnetic Flux ( talk) 03:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
There may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or falseis short for
There may have been an insufficient investigation to either prove that the proposition is true or prove that the proposition is false. To assume that the meaning is
There may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is (either true or false)and that the proposition is a strictly boolean one with no fuzzy borders in the words is to assume that the writer is an idiot. Don't do that. And don't edit-war. -- Hob Gadling ( talk) 11:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
The redirect
Lack of imagination has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 18 § Lack of imagination until a consensus is reached.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
04:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)