Logic 101, a real test

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Many people here think they know logic.  I'm going to post two questions that were actually off a test I took in Logic 103 (a freshman logic class).  Let's see how you do.  I got a half point on one, and a full point on the other, in case anyone is wondering.  All answers must be solved in the shortest number of arguments for full credit (your work must be shown).  Looking up the answers online is in poor taste.


Question 1.  Do UFO's really exist?


Question 2. Why?


As I said, these are two different questions on an actual college logic exam.  Have at them if you dare.

[Brain]

yes, ufo's do exist if you take the most literal meaning. ufo stands for unidentified flying object, therethere for if you see a blinking light at night (for argument's sake let's say it is a plane), and you dont know what it is, it is a ufo to you.  the only frame of reference that you have constant access to and  can be 100% shure of is your own. it may not be unidentified to the passengers and pilots, but there frame of reference is not available to you, thus classifing the plane as a ufo untill you were to perhaps talk to the  pilots or a passenger.

 now, that's probably not the answer you were expecting(hell i changed the meaning of ufo from it's intended one to a different point all together), but it is a logical argument(or an attempt at one) as to why they would exist

[jn.loudnotes]

I like Brain's answer.  

If you're making this a challenge to Bondo, Bucc, which I presume you are, it would be helpful if you'd provide a couple more example questions and their answers.  For those of us who have never been in a logic "class" per se, it's difficult to know what sort of answer your professor wanted. . .

By the way, my favorite test question I've heard of is somewhat of an urban legend.  Is it some kind of clever answer like this you're looking for:

A philosophy professor gives a final exam with one question:

Define courage.

So as everyone else writes long essays, one student writes "THIS" on his paper and leaves.

Or something to that effect.  It's probably better told in person.

[Deadeye]

brain would get a .5 out of two possible points.

[Bondo]

Question 1.  Do UFO's really exist?


Question 2. Why?

1. No, there is no such thing as an unidentified object, much less a flying one because everything had an identity to itself, even if it doesn't to everyone.

2. Why not?

[KoS Ultimo]

Ufo's are big round silver things that crash from the sky. I know they exist because I came from one.

[Ace]

Well I haven't taken a logic class (unless you count digital logic in which case I'll drop some boolean pwnage on ya), so here goes...

Question 1.  Do UFO's really exist?

Yes. From a single person's frame of reference, some flying objects may be unidentifiable. While these objects may be identifiable from another person's frame of reference, the only way for all flying objects to be identifiable would be if one were omniscient. No one is omniscient, therefore UFOs really exist even though they set of UFO's may not be the same for every person.

Question 2. Why?

There is no answer to this question. As Bucc stated, they were two different questions, thus denying any relation between the two. As far as I know, there is no answer to the question "Why?" without some qualifying statement preceding it. (Unless you want to use the uber-cool "Because" response.)

[Jeb]

Question 1.  Do UFO's really exist?


Question 2. Why?


As I said, these are two different questions on an actual college logic exam.  Have at them if you dare.

1. yes they exsist
2. because they probed bondo  

[OoA Rob]

Ok, I'll try this, with my 2 hours of sleep.  Seems like a easy question, yet it is tricky.

First, we have to have a clear understanding of what logic and UFOs are.

logic simply means "to think clearly".

UFO stands for "unidentified flying object".

"un-" as a prefix means by the Webster Dictionary- do the opposite of : reverse.

"Identify" means-to be or become the same

"-ed" -used to form the past participle of regular weak verbs

Therefore, unidentified means "a thing or object not to be the same as another thing or object from the past"
I guess you can say unique.
unique-being the only one

Fly means- a : to move in or pass through the air with wings b : to move through the air or before the wind or through outer space c : to float, wave, or soar in the air

"-ing" sufix- used to form the present participle <sailing> and sometimes to form an adjective resembling a present participle but not derived from a verb

Therefore, flying means "moving through, or hovering in a object"


An object means-something mental or physical toward which thought, feeling, or action is directed

therefore, object means "a mental or a physical thing"

In conclusion,generalized, UFO means "unique, unlike anything else seen before, object hovering or moving through a mental or physical thing".

now we have a basis of what ufo means.

wow, that was more work than i planned on.

I will use Aristotle's type of reasoning based on accurate, justifable observations.  Inductive reasoning- General to specific by utilizing the rules of logic.
1.Major premise(broad statment)
2.Minor premise(narrow)
3.conclusion
An example of one of the first recoded logical conclusion, made by Aristotle, that I know of.
1.All mortals die.
2.All men die.
3.Therefore, men are mortal.

There is a example of a logical conclusion.

NOW FINALLY to the conclusion.

1. If, an object is NOT identified by ONE being/thing UFOs exist.
2. And, NO human being knows everything.
3. Therefore, UFOs DO exist.

those 3 lines are my argument.

Now, I will use Aristotle's treacher's logical reasoning, from Socrates.  A series of questioning for other arguments.  In this case, one question for Bondo.  Do you know everything?  If, there is one non-identified thing, then there are UFOs.

[*NADS Capt. Anarchy]

i was gonna say pretty much the same thing rob said, but in a highly less organized way. He already said it, so i'll just sit down.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

Loudnotes, actually, this was exactly the way it was presented to us.  It was meant to make you really think about it.  And while Bondo was one reason for posting it here, this actually came up in a conversation today, which made me think about it.

After a few more posts, I'll give the "correct" answers (correct being both right and in the least amount of arguments).

Some other quick grades out of a possible two points here:

Rob, 1 point.
Jeb .5 point.
Ace 1 point.
Bondo .75 point. (so close to a full point, but blew it in the end).
Ultimo .25 point.
Brain .75 point. (Deadeye overlooked something)

Loudnotes, you'd probably do well.

Also, I don't want anyone to feel bad.  The class average was .75 point on these two questions.  Nobody got the full 2 points.  The best grade was the 1.5 points, which a couple people had.

the grading scale worked this way.  .5 point for a correct conclusion .5 point for a correct logical argument (correct conclusion or not), deduct .25 point for not the shortest possible proof.

[|MP|Buccaneer]

OK, posting this now because Bondo has already taken one of my clues and changed his answer.

The Answers:

First, the instructions were vauge on purpose.  It is important to both be able to desipher them, but also to not let any of that indecision into the proofs.

Question 1: Do UFO's really exist?

Proof:
UFO stands for Unidentified Flying Object
Objects exist
Objects can fly
Objects can be unidentified
Therefore: UFO's do exist


That's the whole answer.  Shown in it's shortest form (combining statements wouldn't really shorten it).  Of important note here is that I chose UFO to stand for Unidentified Flying Object.  If I had chosen it to stand for something different, I could have still gotten the full point if my argument was correct and in the shortest form.

Question 2: Why?

Proof:
Why not?


Ok, this was a hard one.  Only 1 person got this completely correct in the class.  Bondo loses .25 for declaring that this was it if it wasn't part of the first one (sorry, once submitted, you couldn't change your answer Bondo, especially since my grading scale was a dead giveaway.  I should deduct points for that attempt).

Most people get .5 for presenting a very logical argument on how it's Because or Not answerable.  Other's screwed up because they didn't 1) see that it was a completely different question and 2) missed the obvious that if you are doing a proof, you already answered why for the first one.  Trickey, but you have to think.  Why is the answer Why Not?  When posed with a question that you can't prove, you are always supposed to try to prove the negative.