:python:
"Good evening.
The last scene was interesting from the point of view of a professional logician, because it contained a number of logical fallacies, that is invalid propositional constructions and syllergistic forms of the type so often committed by my wife.
"All wood burns", states Sir Bedivere. Therefore he concludes, "all that burns is wood". This is, of course, pure bull$hit.
Universal affirmatives can only be partially converted; all of Al McCogan is dead, but only some of the class of dead people are Al McCogan. Obvious, one would think.
However, my wife does not understand this necessary limitation of conversion of a proposition, so consequently she does not understand me. For how can a woman expect to appreciate a professor of logic if the simplest cloth-eared syllergism causes her to flounder.
For example, given the premise all fish live underwater and all mackerel are fish, my wife will conclude not that all mackerel live underwater but that if she buys kippers it will not rain, or that trout live in trees or even that I do not love her any more.
This she calls "using her intuition". I call it "crap" and it gets me very irritated because it is not logical.
"There will be no supper tonight!", she will sometimes cry, upon my return home. "Why not?", I will ask ask; "Because I have been screwing the milkman all day!", she will say, quite oblivious of the howling error she has made.
"But", I will wearily point out, "even given that the activities of screwing the milkman and getting supper are mutually exclusive, now that the screwing is over, surely then, supper may now logically be got."
:python:
