Martial Artists of Noble Stature

[algernon]

The individual can choose to accept that and try to meet societies expectations of their noble caste by being truly noble (and in fact, most martial artists expect and hope their black belts will act nobly), or they can be anti-social and ruin socieities expectations (e.g., a bully black belt, a pedophile preist, a mean nurse, a doltish college graduate, etc.).

Ahh, now here is a logical fallacy! This is usually known as a "false dichotomy," or "false dilemma." It is the result of imposing a choice between two extremes where a middle ground actually exists.

[GeoGiant]

Wow this thread has gotten strange. After reading the responses I have to say that I agree with most. Assuming that someone is noble because of an achievement, whether that achievement is a black belt, college degree, etc, seems like a leap of faith.

John has a black belt…. black belts are noble… therefore John is noble… this line of thinking is a very basic fallacy of logic. I warn anyone against assuming someone is noble based on anything other than an individuals actions.

Sorry, I forgot to add the word "all" before black belts. With the word "all" added, this is a fallacy. All black belts are not noble. I'm sure quite sure that I can find a BB that will lie, cheat & steal.

[algernon]

Well, "all" was implied, and in fact is what makes the argument valid. The form of the argument is valid (meaning, if ALL of the premises are true, then the conclusion MUST be true). If all black belts were noble, then John would most definitely would be noble (if he wasn't, it would be false that all black belts are noble). Not all black belts are noble, so the argument does not work. In other words, the argument only fails because it assumes a false premise. The conclusion might be wrong (or not), but only because of an error of facts, not an error of logic (a fallacy is a failure of logic, regardless of the facts involved).

[GeoGiant]

Well, "all" was implied, and in fact is what makes the argument valid. The form of the argument is valid (meaning, if ALL of the premises are true, then the conclusion MUST be true). If all black belts were noble, then John would most definitely would be noble (if he wasn't, it would be false that all black belts are noble). Not all black belts are noble, so the argument does not work. In other words, the argument only fails because it assumes a false premise. The conclusion might be wrong (or not), but only because of an error of facts, not an error of logic (a fallacy is a failure of logic, regardless of the facts involved).

Hu? Sorry if this is straying from the point. Its been a while since I've had a logic class but... I was taught if A = B & B = C, then A = C is a logical fallacy regardless of what A, B, or C are. Assuming A = C is incorrect reasoning.

[Toptomcat]

Nope: if you're dealing with a situation in which if A then B, and if B then C, then A implies C. Your memory's off.

[GeoGiant]

Nope: if you're dealing with a situation in which if A then B, and if B then C, then A implies C. Your memory's off.

I wish I could say that I'm surprised.

[algernon]

As long as the equivocation is complete, it is valid. To express that symbolically, Ξ is used (Ex. A Ξ B) to say "where A occurs, B always occurs, and where B occurs, A always occurs." If B and C have the same relationship (B Ξ C), then where you have an instance of C, you will also have an instance of B, and therefore also an instance of A. Your original example is not identical, but it is a very basic categorical syllogism, and if you draw a Venn diagram, the validity of the form will become quickly apparent.

[Martialart]

Well, I'm glad to see my topic has reduced people (or elevated them) to Boolean algebra. Surely that gives my point of view some validity.

[algernon]

No, it just means that we are being irrelevant.

From your posts on this and another thread, I can't help but get an impression of elitism. Learning a martial art does not elevate you above others, nor does it lower them beneath you.

It is great that you appreciate your training, but it is also important to appreciate other people’s skills and abilities. One of my friends is a very talented artist. Her artistic ability came to be in the same way as my martial arts skills – through a little natural talent and a lot of study and practice. I have no more reason to look down on her for not punching well than she has to look down on me for not painting well. In fact, I’ve taught her some basic maneuvers, and she has tried to teach me to draw. We each have something to offer the other, and “nobility” doesn’t come from “disregard[ing] what lower castes think about the nobility they encounter,” but from having the humility to recognize that.

People outside of the martial arts are not of a “lower caste.” They could walk into a dojo and sign up for classes just as easily as you did, they just chose not to (so far). There is nothing wrong with that. Not everyone wants to practice a martial art. Not everyone wants to pursue a doctorate, or learn to sculpt, or run marathons, or engage in countless other activities that are just as fulfilling as Taekwondo, or kenpo, or boxing. If a martial artist assumes an elitist attitude (and I know plenty who have), it only impedes his own growth – both as a person and as a martial artist – and does a disservice to his school by tarnishing its image.

[Martialart]

No, it just means that we are being irrelevant.

From your posts on this and another thread, I can't help but get an impression of elitism. Learning a martial art does not elevate you above others, nor does it lower them beneath you.

It is great that you appreciate your training, but it is also important to appreciate other people’s skills and abilities. One of my friends is a very talented artist. Her artistic ability came to be in the same way as my martial arts skills – through a little natural talent and a lot of study and practice. I have no more reason to look down on her for not punching well than she has to look down on me for not painting well. In fact, I’ve taught her some basic maneuvers, and she has tried to teach me to draw. We each have something to offer the other, and “nobility” doesn’t come from “disregard[ing] what lower castes think about the nobility they encounter,” but from having the humility to recognize that.

People outside of the martial arts are not of a “lower caste.” They could walk into a dojo and sign up for classes just as easily as you did, they just chose not to (so far). There is nothing wrong with that. Not everyone wants to practice a martial art. Not everyone wants to pursue a doctorate, or learn to sculpt, or run marathons, or engage in countless other activities that are just as fulfilling as Taekwondo, or kenpo, or boxing. If a martial artist assumes an elitist attitude (and I know plenty who have), it only impedes his own growth – both as a person and as a martial artist – and does a disservice to his school by tarnishing its image.

Well, let me ask you this, then: do you think there is anything that makes one person better than another?