Validate Your Life : Productivity and Minimalism, Tech, Atheism, and More show

Validate Your Life : Productivity and Minimalism, Tech, Atheism, and More

Summary: The Validate Your Life and TheNerdCoach main podcast for all projects include audio blog archives, the new audio blog, one and the same recordings episodes, the NLP Practitioner Series, Linuxgeekoid recordings, and the Christmas Carol recordings. This is, unquestionably, the motherload!

Join Now to Subscribe to this Podcast
  • Visit Website
  • RSS
  • Artist: John Thomas Kooz
  • Copyright: Copyright Validate Your Life, TheNerdCoach, and John Kooz. 2003-2012.


 Detest Liars? Your Dislike of Religion is, Therefore, Understandable. Faith is Destructive ‘Packaged Procrastination’; Logic is Win. | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 40:01

A Dislike of Liars is Logically Hand-in-Hand with a Dislike of Religion The scary (or to the more advanced Atheists, merely "the unpleasant") thing about religion and religious people is not only does the very existence of religion attack logic, but scriptures, people and and 'sayings' of religion attack logic directly.  Logic is what shatteres the lies and guise of religion, so of course, to religion, logic and being reasonable is a problem.  Any religious text encourages one to abandon as much reason as possible!  Even New Age rubbish (100% in the same sphere as Christianity, Hinduism, and the Worship of the Flying Spaghetti Monster) condemns the "Intellect" as something that shouldn't be trusted. Why?  Religion attempts to dismantle what it perceives as a threat.  Logic, of course, is a threat to lies and liars.  People whom believe in religion are bold-faced liars, lying to themselves in some way, or at the very least, 100% ignorant and lost, oblivious to their acceptance of lies. I have quite a bit to say about liars but will be brief and maybe have more posts on that later (but no guarantees about that). In high school, first year, in the first month I befriended two chaps and found them to be lying on different occasions.  One chuckled, the other shrugged.  In both instances, I was incensed, furious, and by far, most of all, disgusted.  I wouldn't have anything to do with any of them despite some experiences we had had together.  But when you do something "have an experience" with some person who is a chronic liar, you never really share an experience with them do you?  You share an experience with guise, not them.  I can't stand liars.  They're such a pitiful waste of time, for anyone.  It's not some vendetta for truth (well maybe it is) but it's just like a personal preference of mine, or more accurately, some kind of mental-emotional allergy.  I detest lie liars. I don't have time to fib. I don't have time to lie; I could die! (I like that).  Naturally, if one despises liars, it's quite natural to find religion and its web of fabrications, at the very least, "unpleasant". But anyone can discover truth, it's learning the equations of science, understanding Maxwell's equations, comprehending what it means to have 4 gaseous giant planets and four rock planets in our solar system, to be enamoured with the laws of Thermodynamics and chemistry, and to enjoy Friendly and Perfect numbers.  Those are all things that take deliberate understanding because you understand those things, or you do not. People who believe in mysticism all have their own lost meandering connotations jumbling around in their mind and no one agrees on anything.  Religion takes pride in not only ensuring people stay lost, but that they are individually lost because it encourages "one's own interpretation".  Rubbish; worse, dangerous rubbish. Take scientists or mathematicians working on a problem.  They know when it's solved and then can celebrate and grab a pint together after crunching equations and formulae.  Their is victory in science and math and logic. What is the 'victory' in religion?  Oh, that's right, you have to wait until you've expired, until you're dead!  How is it possibly people are so silly to fall for that?  That's like offering someone a contract saying "I'll give you the best skills of speech and communication...but I get to cut out your tongue". Obviously, that's a scam. And telling peopel they get "after life rewards" is also a scam.  All refutations of that have been refuted in Pascal's Wager.  Others have done a better job of explaining Pascal's Wager, but basically, in a hyper-condensed form, Pascal's Wager is refuted because if you believed in something spiritual just to avoid not doing so, that something spiritual wouldn't respect that. What about the people so horribly sunk and lost that they have deluded themselves (and others) into thinking that they "believe...and have total something spiritual and unproven"?

 Understand the Python ‘Range()’ Function – s02e13 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 1:10

Welcome to the 13th episode of the second season of TheNerdCoach!  As always it's saturday (haha!), so that means a technology post. I won't go into too much detail into the text version because the vid is most illustrative and the podcast helps as well. Here's another superb resource for learning python. Basically (again check the vid for more detail if you want to learn about the python range() function), the range() function is (a,b) with [a,b] being inclusive a, exclusive b.  Therefore, >>> range(2,9) [2,3,4,5,6,7,8] The vid goes into detail with a nested for-loop that functions like the Sieve of Eratosthenes! An intermediate example is a = ['Mary','Had','A','Python','Program'] for i in range(len(a)) print (i,a[i]) OUTPUT 0 Mary 1 Had 2 A 3 Python 4 Program This takes a list a, and uses the length of it (from len(a) = 5) in a range function to print off each individual list element. Cool! for n in range(3,7): for x in range(2,n): if n%x == 0: print (n, 'equals', x, '*', n/x) break else: print (n, 'is a prime # yo!') OUTPUT 3 is a prime # yo! 4 equals 2*2 5 is a prime # yo! 6 equals 2*3   Basically this checks to see if each integer in between the outer-most for range() loop has a remainder of 0 (moduls, %, operator) if it does, then it shows divisors, or what that number is equal to in the form n*n.  If the number passed into the inner-for-loop shows that no number has a remainder of 0 (other than 1 and itself) it says it's a prime number! Python is an elegant and great language developed by Guido van Rossum, whom was recently hired by google.  Python is a great way to learn programming and even code fairly advanced programs!

 How to Sketch a Graph from an Equation – Awesome Sexy Math! – s02e12 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 19:34

This is an exquisitely exciting post! In it we learn how to accurately sketch a graph to extract essential information to then, with an impressive amount of accuracy and precision, 'connect the dots' and sketch the graph on a coordinate x-y plane! Sweet! The first part of the vid surveys what you will be learning. How to determine the: Concavity Intercepts (for the x-axis and y-axis) Maximum or Minimum Coordinate - depending on the concavity of the graph, you will have a maximum coordinate (for concave down graphs) or minimum coordinate (for equations that produce graphs that are concave up) Axis of Symmetry - really just the x-coordinate value of the maximum or minimum coordinate, but this is the invisible line of symmetry that every quadratic graph has (where if you folded the graph over this vertical 'imaginary line of symmetry' the opposite sides of the graph would perfectly overlap each other. Cool! The best way to really learn how to properly sketch a graph by connecting the dots between the four bits of information above is to watch the vid in its entirety. Then here's 'replays' of each section in case you need to review one of those parts. Survey of All the Information Concavity (in Detail) Intercepts (x-axis-intercept and y-axis-intercept) (in Detail) Maximum or Minimum Coordinate (in Detail) Axis of Symmetry (in Detail) Conclusion Finally, find a couple of simple quadratic equations, sketch them, and then use a calculator (or computer graphing program of which there are many freeware versions) to compare your sketched graph to the actual graph! Then optionally increase the complexity of the quadratic equation (larger coefficients possibly) for more practice, but basically now you understand how to sketch the graph of an equation by extracting the graph's concavity, x- and y-intercepts, maximum or minimum coordinate value, and axis of symmetry! Congrats! Jolly good!    

 Containers Can Thwart or Amplify Minimalism – s02e11 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 21:17

Let's move onto investigate this concept of containers in more detail. As you get closer and closer to achieving minimalism, you'll discover that inappropriately (read: non-minimalist ineffectively) used 'containers and organizers' are usually the ene...

 Classical Music Appreciation: Timpanis, Angel Trumpets, and Devil Trombones -s02e10 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 31:48

I wanted to focus on Timpanis, Trumpets, and Trombones.  The title references a line from "A Clockwork Orange" (originally a book by Anthony Burgess and then later a film by Stanley Kubrick).  Because the line and two of the instruments I wanted to briefly focus on overlapped, I included that phrase in the title.  As always, listen to the podcast of this article for more information. Trumpet The trumpet is the highest-pitched brass instrument.  Knowing that, you can identify it in an orchestral piece!  It's fun to identify individual instruments amongst a melody or sound of a lot of other instruments simultaneously.  One way play the trumpet is the method of 'tonguing' which is basically saying 'ta ta ta ta' into the trumpet mouthpiece.  Another way to distort or change the sound of a trumpet is to add what is called a 'mute', which is responsible for the 'wahhhhhh wahhhhhh' sound that so frequently is heard in drippy jazz songs.     Trombone The trombone is an old instrument.  Its basics haven't  changed in over half a millennium.  Despite it's peculiar appearance, it is a surprisingly technical instrument; the trombone has a slide on it.  With the slide pushed in all the way, the trombone is said to be in '1st position'; when the slide is fully extended, the slide is said to be in '7th position'.  Now learning these technical details of this instrument may not directly help you appreciate and identify the sound of this brass instrument but in a way it does.  Knowing more about the technical aspects of an instrument genuinely galvanizes your ability to identify it out of the other instruments in a full orchestra, as well as appreciate its sound and possibly, at the very least, the difficulty in mastering it from the point of view of the musician.  Just like the trumpet has special sound effects (like the 'tah tah' or the extra mechanism 'mute'), the trumpet can make a 'glissando' which is sliding from 7th to 1st or 1st to 7th position.    Haydn's trumpet concerto is a great place to hear the trumpet as well as Strauss's work.  Finally, Bolero (from last week's classical music appreciation on Maurice Ravel) is a great way to hear some of these instruments.   Timpani The timpani is more commonly known as the kettle drum; those two words (kettle drum and timpani) are synonymous.  Like many of the words in classical music, timpani has italian linguistic origins and is plural because there are usually more than one timpani in any orchestra.  One place you may have definitely heard and recall the timpani is the slow drum roll in Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey.  Believe it or not a kettle drum (timpani) can be tuned . This tuning is accomplished by tightening the head of the timpani.  Additionally, on a similar level of interesting-ness, anatomically in one's ear  the 'timpanic membrane' which is involved in 'hearing' is directly related to 'timpani'!  Modern kettle drums actually have a way to tighten and tune the head of the timpani via foot pedals, which enables a timpanist to be able to have sort of a glissando-like effect but with the percussion sound of the timpani!  The most renowned and common sound effect from the kettle drum is the 'drum roll'.  It's awesome knowing what instrument produces the 'drum roll' if you have used that phrase, as I have, in speaking and/or writing. Finally, because it was another 'T' instrument, I threw in the Tuba although it is not mentioned in the title.  The tuba is a brass instrument that requires an enormous amount of breath support.  Mussorgsky's Pictures at an Exhibition' is a great place to hear the tuba. You can definitely hear other patterns by learning about some of the details of these instruments. TheNerdCoach Season 2: Episode #10 Podcast#157 Classical Music Appreciation: Timpanis, Angel Trumpets, and Devil Trombones by John Thomas Kooz is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.  

 Names – Interesting Things Aren’t They? Well, They’re Incorrect! | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 37:23

Names.  They're interesting things aren't they? Hey Frank! Howdy Sarah! Hey Martha! Hey George! People use names for identity, but that is incorrect.  People reference other people with names, utilizing names as 'identifiers' (a concept of Logic).  But what is it with names?  Why the obsession with keeping one's birth name?  Keeping one's birth name is about as silly as staying in the same town in which one was physically born or as ludicrous as mimicking the political or religious views of one's parents.  You change your location, you change your life purpose, why not change your name? This post is unquestionably an extension (part 2, if you will) of the How Charlie Sheen Got His Name (Name Change Story) post.  One of the most superb examples of a human who understands the trivial nature of one's birth name is English Musician Gordan Matthew Thomas Sumner, except no one, not himself, not his kids, not even his mother knows who Gordon Matthew Thomas Sumner is.  Why?  Because Sting logically abandoned that string of random identifiers and crafted his own name.  It started off as a nickname from wearing a sweater that made him look like a bumble bee.  He wanted to use the name Sting and so that he did.  Here's a superb quote of how meaningless his birthname is to the successful Sting: He was addressed by a journalist as "Gordon", and replied: "My children call me Sting, my mother calls me Sting, who is this Gordon character?" In a 2011 interview for Time magazine, he stated: "I was never called Gordon. You could shout Gordon in the street and I would just move out of your way." If there were ever a hero for advocating name changes it's 100% Sting. Complications with Name Changes There are a lot of complications to a name change.  People called me 'Kooz' in school.  I liked that and began using that name in various places.  In 2008 I some really excellent friends called me a different name (that was not Kooz), my birth name was completely 100% irrelevant and even awkward.  However, when I wanted to do a legal name change in 2006 I found it expensive, legally complicated, and frowned upon (but a wayward and unhelpful lawyer).  Financial institutions like banks are often obstacles as well for name changes, as are formal official documents like a passport. But all those complications aside, for the past 6 years (half a dozen years) my birth name has been an awkward and cumbersome "shed skin" that gets in the way.  One of the most telling moments of a personal identity shift was when I was in a grocery store a few months ago (around 2012 June) and some employee said on the intercom 'John to...' some aisle or to the cash register.  That announcement blared at least 2-3 times.  Only in bicycling back from the grocery store did I realize that when that name 'John' was announced I didn't even flinch; it had 100% zero impact on me. One's name is fairly incredibly important, but one's birth name is incredibly cumbersome and trivial and at times meaningless, and a lot more people than you realize have changed their names! I think the obsession with birth names (aside from the complications) is erroneously attributed to lineage and ancestry.  I remember I had some distant (3rd or 4th removed) cousin, or maybe he was a distant Uncle, who knows, contact me in 2009.  He was doing one of those ancestry charts and found that we were related by some great-great-great-great grandfather or something.  It was interesting and exciting, but I realized later that humans are just a species, of course we're related.  Why the obsession with identifying whom your great-times10-grandparents are or that you are a descendant of some ancient person?  What is the obsession with that lineage scrutiny?  Ironically, it's one searching for identity.  But identity is like Object Oriented Programming, you can code functions and then call them, you can make what you need.  Identity is 'open source'.

 Voice Journal – France Journal (Part 3) – Indifference for Survival, Man Crushes, Admirable Male Friends, Fantasizing about Women, If Travel/Lodging were Free, and More Awesome Things – s02e08 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 29:58

The voice journal shares details of significance and what was going on with these photos. Jolly good!   I like the juxtaposition of these photos because of the simple and blatant fact that a shower and minimal grooming can work wonders for appearance, sanity, and emotional well-being (not to mention an explicit hygiene boost!)             Goal of Voice Journal is to reveal embarrassing things that you would normally put in a journal.  So the goal of a 'voice journal' is to share some of those, but the challenge is deciding where to draw the line and what is 'too appropriate/inappropriate', or 'too embarrassing'. This recording (the full recording, most of which I am very uncertain about posting) got embarassingly long.  In part, while everything I said was my own ideas, I felt like my mind got a bit hijacked because I wouldn't have normally shared any/all of that.   While the impoverished in Paris Miller wrote some amusing anecdotes.  However, imho, Miller’s account of poverty in Paris is a child’s nursery rhyme compared to the truly enthralling ‘Down and Out in Paris and London’ where Orwell writes: “You discover, for instance, the secrecy attaching to poverty….You discover that a man who has gone even a week on bread and margarine is not a man any longer, only a belly with a few accessory organs.” “”"You go to the baker’s to buy a pound of bread, and you wait while the girl cuts a pound for another customer. She is clumsy, and cuts more than a pound. ‘_Pardon, monsieur_,’ she says, ‘I suppose you don’t mind paying two sous extra?’ Bread is a franc a pound, and you have exactly a franc. When you think that you too might be asked to pay two sous extra, and would have to confess that you could not, you bolt in panic. It is hours before you dare venture into a baker’s shop again. You go to the greengrocer’s to spend a franc on a kilogram of potatoes. But one of the pieces that make up the franc is a Belgian piece,and the shopman refuses it. You slink out of the shop, and can never go there again. You have strayed into a respectable quarter, and you see a prosperous friend coming. To avoid him you dodge into the nearest café. Once in the café you must buy something, so you spend your last fifty centimes on a glass of black coffee with a dead fly in it. Once could multiply these disasters by the hundred. They are part of the process of being hard up. You discover the boredom which is inseparable from poverty; the times when you have nothing to1 do and, being underfed, can interest yourself in nothing. For half a day at a time you lie on your bed, feeling like the_jeune squelette_ in Baudelaire’s poem. Only food could rouse you. You discover that a man who has gone even a week on bread and margarine is not a man any longer, only a belly with a few accessory organs. “”" Conclusively, Miller is rubbish superficiality compared to Orwell, but I liked seeing a mindful quotation of one’s personal experience of poverty. I was ‘down and out’ in paris (and other places) at times, and then later discovered works like Orwell’s, which made those experiences feel less hollow and bleak afterwards. And while I can’t fully relate to the yearnings for ‘food’ hunger (I wasn’t as impoverished as them for food (most of the time), can relate to other yearnings like career success, sex, and/or completion of projects at times. Stumbling upon ‘down and out’ after being (not starving for food) but genuinely ‘down and out’ and sporadically homeless in paris (nothing as extreme as Orwell’s experience however), was some of the most engaging reading had had in a long time. But I have other projects. The american view of poverty is naive.   Right...I ramble extensively about things that seem meaningful and/or poignant and/or embarassing including: the fact that this recording is so long is embarassing (jeepers, how much time does this guy have?)

 Want to “Believe”? Logic is Believing and Their Exists Zero Alternatives – s02e07 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 33:39

Logic is believing.  People who truly "believe" and "have faith" never have faith in the traditional sense.  Instead, "true believers" use logic.  Logic is hard, it's challenging, it's correct or incorrect, proven or unproven - there is no grey area.  ...

 Android Activities – Understand The Activity Manager, Life Cycle, Focus, Visible, and ‘In Memory’ – s02e06 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 25:10

I went ahead and made this nifty spreadsheet illustrating how each of the states of an Activity: Starting Running Paused Stopped Destroyed is a combination of 'In Focus', 'Visible', and/or (or not) 'In Memory' Awesome!  First off,...

 Friendly Numbers and Perfect Numbers – s02e05 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 11:37

A friendly number's friend is a number who's proper divisors (all divisors except the number itself) sum to the number's 'friend'! Explanation Proper divisors of, for example: 7 = 1 16 = 1,2,4,8 32 = 1,2,4,8,16 33 = 1 39 = 1,3,13 Two numbers are "friends" when their proper divisors sum to the total of the other number.  Pythagorus first discovered and made the definition of "friendly numbers" with 220 and 284. The proper divisors of 220 are: 1,2,4,5,10,11,20,22,44,55,110 And their sum equals 284.  Astonishingly (and awesomely and just completely the proof that 220 and 284 are numerical 'friends'!) the proper divisors of 284 1,2,4,71,142 sum to equal 220! Surprisingly, friendly numbers are very far and few in between.  Pierre de Fermat discovered a friendly number pair in 1636 with the 17,296 and 18,416. Naturally, friendly numbers share good emotional hygiene, look out for each other, and numerically are related! I like the idea of friendly numbers because it's accessible math (i.e. you don't need a math degree to understand them) and they're fun and satisfying to observe, calculate, and identify.  If you look at two friendly numbers like 220 and 284, they do eventually seem like friends! Strongly related to "friendly numbers" is the "perfect number".  Like "friendly numbers", a perfect number is something defined and devised by Pythagorus.  A perfect number is any number who's other divisors sum up to that number itself. An example is 6 (1+2+3 = 6). Another example of a perfect number is 28 (1+2+4+7+14 = 28). Surprisingly there are very few perfect numbers.  This is surprising because glancing at the divisors of many numbers it seems that they would fit the definition of a "perfect number", but many do not.  Six and twenty-eight do as well as a few other numbers that fit the criteria for "perfect number", and that's that definition!

 Visualize the Full Life Circuit from Entrance to Exit of an Acquisition – s02e04 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 15:32

Visualize the entrance and exit of every acquisition. hakespeare famously writes in 'As You Like It', "All the world's a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances,". Well every item in your life has its entrance and exit as well! Visualize the full lifespan of an item in your possession. Visualize getting the box and using a knife to open the tape on the box containing the device or item and then visualize the device leaving your life in xyz amount of days, months, or years. There's actually a surprisingly limited number of ways one of your pieces of cluttering crap can exit your life! The item can be:   There's very few ways that clutter can actually exit your life. Apply the Shakespearean frame of everything having an entrance or exit to your belongings, and you will quickly comprehend that some things you may not want in the first place in envisioning their full life cycle! When you envision not just acquiring but eventually parting with an item, your thinking is more comprehensive and thus your decisions on what to get and what to say “no” to will have more integrity and logic. Applying logic, as you should understand by now, will protect and/or increase your minimalism. When considering the acquisition of an item, visualize every detail of ownership. I selectively and very deliberately chose the word "acquisition" for the obtaining of an item, of an object. The reason for this is items and objects are investments. You don't stop off at the local grocery store and "pick up 10,000 shares of stock". Similarly, you shouldn't "pick up" an item, as casually as that, that could potentially be in your life for years such acquisitions require consideration and considering the life-cycle of an item will avoid clutter because you will be more apt to store it effectively, envision and see to proper maintenance, and/or possibly not acquire the item at all!. A good apex-productivity item is in your life for years. Items are investments of time, of money, of energy, of maintenance, of thought, of worry (for valuable items), and many other burdens. Take the example of acquiring a cell phone. Will you need extra chargers? Will you want a pocket holster? A protective case for it? Will you want a dock for the cell phone? Will the device be compatible with pre-existing technology gadgets you own? What about carrier plans, would you get one of those? What will you do with the device if it breaks or if (in the highly likely event that) you get an upgrade in a year)? Being mindful of all of these considerations, including the entrance and exit of any possession into your life can Really exquisitely shape how you acquire things. Seriously, do this. I'll recount a few personal examples of items and since the initial example was a technological device, I will continue that theme and provide examples of technological devices, namely laptops. Mind you, I was not as advanced in minimalism at the time of most of these "entrances and exits" of devices. A 13.3 laptop I acquired autumn 2007; it was something I asked someone else for. I didn't envision where it would go with finite receptacles and coordinates. Computers are important for my work for audio recording and editing and website work, writing, and more (and a bit for gaming fun) but it's much different and much more enjoyable acquiring a computer in alignment with the POPP Principles than not doing so. I remember picking up the box at the someone else's location. Strangely, I didn't open it for a few weeks because I was busy with other computer things on my non-apple laptop. This had a discombobulating effect on me, but was, however, a good-sized laptop. I have had laptops of larger size and they're too clunky and cumbersome to be considered mobile devices, really. So I acquired that laptop and used it a great deal. A lot of gaming on it. I designed at least two websites on it, and easily wrote over 100,000 words on it.

 Classical Music Appreciation: Ravel – s02e03 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 16:07

After Korsakov, Cui, and Mussorgsky, this breaks the pattern of focusing on Russian music (the previous three of the Mighty Five).  Ravel, whom lived from 1875-1937 (62 years old), was a french composer and is particularly known for his melodies and instrumental effects with his piano, chamber, and orchestral work.  He wrote copious piano compositions include the 'water games' piece.   He wrote another piece dedicated to people who died in WW1.  Thus, while it functions as a memorial, it is an homage to french stylistic music. Bolero, composed as a ballet for a Russian ballerina is a large-scale ballet (written for a very large orchestra) and is one of Ravel's best known works.  Criticism of Bolera suggests that the piece lacks form . Whether or not you share that opinion, Bolero is a famous piece that appears all over the place in soundtracks and in themes and has been played by many different orchestras. After 4 years after completing Bolero, in 1932, Ravel had a severe concussion in a horrendous taxi accident, suffered amnesia and other cognitive difficulties for the next five years, before dying in 1937.  Thus, Bolero was Ravel's (arguably) best, one of his most well known, and one of his last works created. It's worth mentioning Claude DeBussy, another great french composer.  The two, while having a mild rivalry, once collaborated, and played each other's music, which is quite touching and interesting. This is on odd but accurate observation: Ravel's career was 'weird' because it was marked with a direct and continues progress in music.  In other words, Ravel studied piano in school and studied music throughout his life.  By far, greater than majority, Stravinsky, the very modernist and atonal Russian composer, commented that Ravel was like the sharpest of swiss watch-makers and Ravel's disposition does, agreed, look quite chiseled and sharp.  His music often reflects his chiseled disposition as well. Podcast #150.

 A Truth and Two Lies (Part 2): More Examples of Logical Fallacies – s02e02 | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 17:08

This is a continuation and elaboration on Part 1,Two Lies and a Truth: Denying the Antecedent, Affirming the Consequent, and Modus Tollens. More Examples Did that merely whet your appetite (or broach your comprehension) for understanding the difference between those two lies and a truth? If so, then here are a few more examples; first, we'll start with one that is true! Conditional Premise: If I am drinking out of this cup, then there is fluid in it. First off, is that true? Yes, there's no way to drink out of a cup without their being a fluid in it. You could be acting but acting is not the same as actually drinking a fluid and you can't "drink" solids or air so there would have to be a fluid in that cup if you were drinking out of it. Premise: There is not water in that cup. Therefore, I am not and cannot be drinking out of it. That is true and that is our good friend modus tollens! Righto! Moving on to the two fallacious brethren (in-law) of modus tollens. Same conditional Premise: If I am drinking out of this cup, then there is water in. Premise: I am not drinking out of the cup. Therefore, there is not water in it. What logical fallacy is that? It is none other than the deceptively vile, denying the antecedent! Now is thise false? Of course it is. I could poor a cup of tea and leave it on the counter. The tea could get cold and then I could poor it out. There was a fluid in the cup but it was not drunk. Affirming the antecedent does not disprove the consequent! Affirming that I didn't drink the tea does not prove that there is no fluid in the cup! Denying the antecedent is, well, DENIED! Moving on. Same Conditional Premise: If I am drinking out of this cup, then there is fluid in it. Premise: There is fluid in the cup. Therefore, I am drinking out of that cup. Is that necessarily true? Of course not. I could pour a nice cup of tea and then an enormous fly could land in it and then a bird could crap a steaming dangle of bird poo right in my tea. Am I drinking out of that cup? Heck no! Absolutely not, good sir! There is fluid in it but I am most certainly NOT drinking out of that cup. Affirming the Consequent is DENIED and disproven! Again, with (non if and only if) traditional conditional premises, denying the consequent is the only way to prove anything, in this case, the antecendent, thanks to modus tollens! Felis Catus and Logic: A Volatile Combination One more example to solidify and anchor in the awesome distinction between truth (modus tollens) and lies (denying the antecedent and affirming the consequent) or at the very least, veracity and fallacy. This time I'll involve my beloved feline friend, whom despite a reputation for intelligence (and cats truly are quite intelligent), can be slightly less than logical. If my cat his hungry, he will eat his food. His food was not eaten. Therefore he was not hungry. Okay, this is interesting. Is this affirming the consequent or denying the antecedent? No, it is neither; this is denying the consequent, which is none other than modus tollens. But is it true? No! It is false, but importantly not because of modus tollens, but rather, because of the formation of the sentence content. My cat could be starving but the wet cat food could be rotten and moldy. Or a huge crate could have fallen preventing my cat from getting to the food meanwhile his stomach is gnawing at him and he's meowing ferociously at his hunger. So what is happening? Is the logical architecture of all that is good and true and clear in the world crumbling? Will I suddenly step outside and look up to see the ground and look down to see if it's cloudy? Will logical fallacies have victory over truth? Will the hosts of illogical evil flood into the stronghold of truth and logic and will all that is good crumple? (drum roll) Nope. Of course not. Here's what happened. Unlike the "drinking then fluid in the cup" conditional premise,

 TheNerdCoach Season 2 ! Voice Journal: France Photo Journal (Part 2) | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 35:30

Welcome Back to Season 2 of TheNerdCoach Podcast.  This is Episode 1 of the second season!  It is also podcast #148 for the entire site. John Thomas Kooz has done over a hundred podcasts for many years on Validate Your Life, but TheNerdCoach Seasons are a new highly-structured installment.  It is 21 consecutive podcast episodes each day for a week, with 7 types of day-specific content.  Learn more about TheNerdCoach seasons here. The Photo Journal Continues... Just as the previous TheNerdCoach schematic featured a voice journal on Mondays, that structure has, well, endured.  The first part LINK of the France journal had much more detail in the written portion of the post but this post shares most through the audio podcast.  Still the focus of the voice journals is simply to be candid about experiences and reflections and ideas of experiences in different environments. Here's the five photos from this segment of the French photo journal.  If you want more details listen to my podcast. All the details are in the podcast and each photo accessed some reflections, ideas, and whereabouts.  Good times! In Gare. Whithered, frayed, weathered flag. Clock tower. Zoology building from park bench rest before police officers checked passport. Construction zone reminded me of Costa Rica. Podcast#148 TheNerdCoach S02E01. A part of this voice journal  has been challenging for me to do for many reasons: embarrassment, stressfulness of some of the experiences, and other reasons. One thing I noticed how living in France is very different from visiting France for a few days.  You develop different tastes.  France, in my humble opinion, is a very serious place.  The people are serious.  That's a shock, but something that is delightfully welcome, at times. In this voice journal, intrinsic truths are discussed.  Additionally, there is the phenomenon of different places activating different 'modes of behaviour'.  In France (like in other continents and places), Voice work emerged as an intrinsic truths. Some more highlights are: intrinsic truths environment-based behaviours personal insights, ideas, and reflections Cheers! Thanks for listening to the voice journal.  Be sure to stay tuned for more knowledge-based articles and podcasts.

 Two Lies and a Truth: Denying the Antecedent, Affirming the Consequent, and Modus Tollens | File Type: audio/mpeg | Duration: 46:49

This has been a small excerpt from my book on logical fallacies.  Check back on this site for future updates regarding that release. Introduction Affirming the Consequent and Denying the Antecedent are the two logical fallacies you will learn about now. However, I will present those two logical fallacies by first introducing a non-fallacious simple and very useful and valid argument form, the logical "modus tollens". "Modus tollens" is a valid argument that proves a logical conclusion given a true premise. I will present "modus tollens" because the two fallacies that you are now learning very much resemble (but are crucially and vitally different) modus tollens. Thus, if you learn all three: the true and valid "modus tollens" and the two nearly identical (closely resembling modus tollens) logical fallacies, affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent, you will be able to spot the two fallacies more easily and all the while will know a valid argument form to boot! Because the two fallacies you are now learning are frequently used (but always will be fallacious), it would be silly to not learn modus tollens. In other words, learning the two logical fallacies, affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent, but not learning the close-resembling valid argument modus tollens would be a bit like studying the east coast of Romania and Bulgaria and the west coasts of Russia and the northern border of Turkey, but not at all mentioning or learning about the Black Sea, the body of water that all the aforementioned borders share. So you will learn 1 true valid argument and then will have heightened acuity to quickly detect the two closely related (but invalid) logical fallacies. That's a perfect analogy; true, modus tollens is not a logical fallacy just as the Black Sea is not not land-based shore, but the two logical fallacies you are now learning share a resemblance to modus tollesn just as the aforementioned borders are connected ot the Black Sea body of water.   Modus Tollens Modus Tollens is NOT a logical fallacy, but a valid conclusion-proving argument form. In short, in reading this book, you will replace illogical thinking with clear, lucid reasoning, some of which that takes the form of modus tollens. Its form is this: If P then Q NOT Q Therefore, not P It is also called denying the consequent because Q (the consequent) is, well, denied or shown to be false. Once you explore and then solidify your comprehension of that valid argument you will see what I mean about it closely resembling the two slightly (but fundamentally) different logical fallacies. I will now present the two logical fallacies and then discuss all three (the 1 valid argument and 2 logical fallacies). Denying the Antecedent Denying the Antecedent has the fallacious form: If p, then Q Not P. Therefore, not Q. Here's an application of DtA that seems to have the appearance of truth, but is false. It should be noted that this fallacious argument was thought up by the great computer scientist Alan Turing in "Computing Machinery and Intelligence": If each man had a definite set of rules of conduct by which he regulated his life, then he would be no better than a machine. There are no such rules. Therefore, men cannot be machines. In abreviated form: If each man had life-regulating conduct rules, he would be a machine. No life-regulating conduct rules exist. Therefore man is not a machine. Now the fact that the above is indeed a logical fallacy makes you wonder then are human machines? That's an interesting and plausible theory, but concluding that from the fact that the above is a logical fallacy would be itself a logical fallacy! Showing that hte above is a DtA logical fallacy leaves the possibility open that humans are machines, but does not prove that that is so. Here's a simpler application of DtA that is obviously false: If my computer monitor does show my desktop, then the monitor is not broken.


Login or signup comment.