Stephen Curry salary almost cut in half by California taxes

[ducks]

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2017/09/22/stephen-curry-salary-almost-cut-in-half-in-california-taxes.html

[Blake]

Poor curry

[ducks]

it is pathetic that cal things they can keep taxing like that
he has spents millions of hours trying to earn a living

yes if I was in his shoes I would be ok to pay it but still with the way cal spends the money why

[boutons_deux]

Fox hate-govt bullshit, suckers ducks-type assholes every time

[SpursforSix]

Fox hate-govt bullshit, suckers ducks-type assholes every time

https://media2.giphy.com/media/13cMYrbpeJsX8Q/giphy.gif

[InRareForm]

rough life

[Spurminator]

Very altruistic of Fox News to complain on behalf of Steph Curry. How strange that they didn't approach him for comment.

[Blake]

It looked like state/city taxes equaled 11%.

[phxspurfan]

It looked like state/city taxes equaled 11%.

Sounds about right. I live in CA and I think state is about 10-10.5%

Doesn't help that he's in the top fed tax bracket but I'm sure he has *some* deductions he doesn't state here lol

[DMC]

He could come to the Spurs and make lots of money, except he'd have to come off the bench behind Tony.

[Spurtacular]

Very altruistic of Fox News to complain on behalf of Steph Curry. How strange that they didn't approach him for comment.

Would you be hopeful that he's excited to pay all that?

[ElNono]

You'll notice from that article that the difference is about 5-8% compared to other players.

The reason is that players file income taxes not just on the state they reside, but on every state where they played a game. So they all end up paying more or less the same.

More info here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2017/04/18/income-taxes-for-pro-athletes-are-reminder-of-how-complicated-u-s-tax-code/

Basically, every NBA player's salary is cut almost in half due to taxes from many states.

There's legit reasons to badmouth Cali taxes, tbh, but when you take a closer look, this one certainly isn't one of them.

[Th'Pusher]

You'll notice from that article that the difference is about 5-8% compared to other players.

The reason is that players file income taxes not just on the state they reside, but on every state where they played a game. So they all end up paying more or less the same.

More info here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2017/04/18/income-taxes-for-pro-athletes-are-reminder-of-how-complicated-u-s-tax-code/

Basically, every NBA player's salary is cut almost in half due to taxes from many states.

There's legit reasons to badmouth Cali taxes, tbh, but when you take a closer look, this one certainly isn't one of them.

What are some of the good reasons to badmouth Cali's Tax structure?

[Spurminator]

Would you be hopeful that he's excited to pay all that?

Is the absence of outrage excitement?

[Chris]

What are some of the good reasons to badmouth Cali's Tax structure?

:lol

[Splits]

911572182060453893

[Spurminator]

:lmao The sensitivity. He's like a 14 year old girl planning a sleepover.

[Splits]

:lmao The sensitivity. He's like a 14 year old girl planning a sleepover.

Don't tell Avante

[ducks]

Honor to see inside Wh
Steph is wrong

[Spurminator]

Don't tell Avante

Too old, tbh

[ElNono]

What are some of the good reasons to badmouth Cali's Tax structure?

For actual residents, the fact that not only income tax is among the highest in the nation, but also their sales tax is (which gets compounded by county sales taxes too), is a much easier target to criticize, IMO.

[ElNono]

911610455877021697

:wow Lebron going IN

[ElNono]

oops, missed the other thread

[baseline bum]

Damn LeBron mopping the floor with Trump's ass

[ducks]

really
atleast he campaigned for Hillary(so people would show up) but the people elected trump

he tried to do something before the fact. I do not agree with his views on politically but I respect he did something before the election

[hater]

Pobrecito Eliancito

[Spurtacular]

Is the absence of outrage excitement?

Would you be hopeful that he's excited to pay all that?

[Spurminator]

Would you be hopeful that he's excited to pay all that?

Not excited, no. Who gets excited about taxes?

Is the absence of outrage excitement?

[Spurtacular]

Not excited, no. Who gets excited about taxes?

Is the absence of outrage excitement?

If they did as much good as liberals like to pretend, I should think that many would be excited about paying taxes.

[Spurminator]

If they did as much good as liberals like to pretend, I should think that many would be excited about paying taxes.

Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing.

[Spurtacular]

Non sequitur.

Thanks for playing.

Obviously, you don't know what a non sequitur is. This is precisely why people should stop pretending that the science of logic is to be rigorously applied to message boards.

[Spurminator]

Obviously, you don't know what a non sequitur is.

This is precisely why people should stop pretending that the science of logic is to be rigorously applied to message boards.

:lol If you say so.

I just asked a question (twice) that you can't answer without changing the subject. I'm surprised you didn't jump straight to the Clinton white flag like usual.

[Spurtacular]

:lol If you say so.

I just asked a question (twice) that you can't answer without changing the subject. I'm surprised you didn't jump straight to the Clinton white flag like usual.

I was the first one to ask a question, which you answered with a question. I'd say you're the one who changed the subject.

There is no Clinton white flag either. If you're going to say someone is a racist while supporting the most racist person in the field, you're going to get called out. You didn't even wave a white flag, you just ran like a bitch. :lmao

[ducks]

Sooo, a player/team says they won't go to the Whitehouse because it's Trump. And so the President withdraws the offer. And now HE'S the one dividing the country over sports? Laughable. This crap all started with Kapernick and has made its way around the world of sports.

[Pavlov]

Sooo, a player/team says they won't go to the Whitehouse because it's Trump.Wrong.

[ducks]

Yes you are

[Pavlov]

Yes you areNope. Your copied premise is false. The team hadn't voted and Curry was going to act according to that.

Get your facts straight.

[ducks]

Curry could not wait he above team

[Spurminator]

I was the first one to ask a question, which you answered with a question. I'd say you're the one who changed the subject.

Your question was based on the false premise that one must be excited about paying taxes if they're not outraged by it.

The Fox article presents Curry's tax rate as an outrageous burden, yet it's telling that aside from quoting a tweet of his (where he basically says it's not a big deal) they don't care to get his statement on the matter. As they know, if they had gotten his opinion on his tax rate, they would have probably had to quote him saying he didn't mind, he's blessed, or whatever. Doesn't fit the narrative so well.


There is no Clinton white flag either. If you're going to say someone is a racist while supporting the most racist person in the field, you're going to get called out. You didn't even wave a white flag, you just ran like a bitch. :lmao

There you go again. :yield

[pgardn]

Obviously, you don't know what a non sequitur is. This is precisely why people should stop pretending that the science of logic is to be rigorously applied to message boards.

WTF is the SCIENCE of logic? Logic is a practice we use which follows a set of reasonable rules.
Science USES logic ya dumb shit.

[Spurtacular]

Your question was based on the false premise that one must be excited about paying taxes if they're not outraged by it.

The Fox article presents Curry's tax rate as an outrageous burden, yet it's telling that aside from quoting a tweet of his (where he basically says it's not a big deal) they don't care to get his statement on the matter. As they know, if they had gotten his opinion on his tax rate, they would have probably had to quote him saying he didn't mind, he's blessed, or whatever. Doesn't fit the narrative so well.



There you go again. :yield

I wasn't arguing a premise, dude. I was asking a question for discovery. Again, you should stop trying to apply the rigors of logic; you are constantly misapplying them.

And you were complaining about FN not saying Curry's side when he left a tweet on this? And post the quote; at this point, I wonder if you aren't putting words into Curry's mouth....

Bro, don't try to pretend your L on Clinton is actually a W. That's just pathetic. You ran like a bitch; the record shows this.

[Spurtacular]

WTF is the SCIENCE of logic? Logic is a practice we use which follows a set of reasonable rules.
Science USES logic ya dumb shit.

http://media.fakeposters.com/results/2010/09/22/mwji5zw8ia.gif

You seriously need to go sit in a fucking corner or something...


Logic is the science of rational thinking or reasoning. Logic is the science of rational thinking or reasoning. As such, it includes found a tion of the scientific method including the hypothetico-deductive a ccount of science.

http://www.renyi.hu/~nemeti/whatislogic.html

[pgardn]

http://media.fakeposters.com/results/2010/09/22/mwji5zw8ia.gif

You seriously need to go sit in a fucking corner or something...

No its not.
Science is simply a way of observing, experimenting USING LOGIC in order to try and understand the world around us.
Logic is NOT a science. Logic is a way of thinking studied in Philosophy. But, but it's on the Internet. And it's flat out wrong. Science USES logic. Science USES certain types of reasoning to understand the world around us. Just like Math is not a science. It's the language of some types of science.

You and your reference suck. Seriously.

[Spurtacular]

No its not.
Science is simply a way of observing, experimenting USING LOGIC in order to try and understand the world around us.
Logic is NOT a science. Logic is a way of thinking studied in Philosophy. But, but it's on the Internet. And it's flat out wrong. Science USES logic. Science USES certain types of reasoning to understand the world around us. Just like Math is not a science. It's the language of some types of science.

You and your reference suck. Seriously.

Okay, I'll go back and tell my university logic teacher that he was an idiot for spending all that time talking about how logic is a science....

Seriously, go find a fucking corner and sit in it.

[pgardn]

Okay, I'll go back and tell my university logic teacher that he was an idiot for spending all that time talking about how logic is a science....

Seriously, go find a fucking corner and sit in it.

Oh No! Not your... Teacher!

Do that then.
And give him what I wrote.
If he's worth a shit he will understand what you don't.

You. Are flat out wrong.

The science of this, the science of that... Is there a science of philosophy ya frkn dork?

[Blake]

Obviously, you don't know what a non sequitur is. This is precisely why people should stop pretending that the science of logic is to be rigorously applied to message boards.

Of course because it'd be much easier if people took your stupid claims at face value.

[Spurtacular]

Oh No! Not your... Teacher!

Do that then.
And give him what I wrote.
If he's worth a shit he will understand what you don't.

You. Are flat out wrong.

The science of this, the science of that... Is there a science of philosophy ya frkn dork?

If you want to be a bombastically wrong jackass, that's your deal. I don't need to go back and ask my professor if my interpretation of the many times he said, "logic is science" is wrong. It was a running theme throughout the curriculum, ffs. Did you even take a class in logic?

[Spurtacular]

Of course because it'd be much easier if people took your stupid claims at face value.

That's never been my position, JV Chump.

[pgardn]

If you want to be a bombastically wrong jackass, that's your deal. I don't need to go back and ask my professor if my interpretation of the many times he said, "logic is science" is wrong. It was a running theme throughout the curriculum, ffs. Did you even take a class in logic?

This is exactly what Plato wrote about. He thought that pure reasoning and logic could be obscured by the senses. Meaning merely observing and experimenting could ruin pure reason. Science uses OBSERVATION and EXPERIMENTATION to make sense of the world AROUND us. Logic is not a SCIENCE. Science USES logic to make reasonable statements about our surroundings. Now even including, what goes on inside our own heads (neurology and such).

If you had any background besides your stupid blustering you would know this.
You are just wrong. And I don't give a Fk what your JC curriculum said.

[Spurtacular]

This is exactly what Plato wrote about. He thought that pure reasoning and logic could be obscured by the senses. Meaning merely observing and experimenting could ruin pure reason. Science uses OBSERVATION and EXPERIMENTATION to make sense of the world AROUND us. Logic is not a SCIENCE. Science USES logic to make reasonable statements about our surroundings. Now even including, what goes on inside our own heads (neurology and such).

If you had any background besides your stupid blustering you would know this.
You are just wrong. And I don't give a Fk what your JC curriculum said.

I'm not wrong, dude. You're making ass of yourself. Seriously, did you even take a class in logic? This is something that people learn on Day 1.


Logic is not a SCIENCE. Science USES logic to make reasonable statements about our surroundings. -- That would honestly be like saying physics is not science because it uses chemistry (science).

[Spurtacular]

And I don't give a Fk what your JC curriculum said.

Gee, I wish I had specifically said "university professor." Oh, wait; I fucking did! You're seriously a fucking tool.

[pgardn]

I'm not wrong, dude. You're making ass of yourself. Seriously, did you even take a class in logic? This is something that people learn on Day 1.

-- That would honestly be like saying physics is not science because it uses chemistry (science).

Not it would not. Because Chemistry and Physics both use observation and experimentation. So your statement again shows a misunderstanding of what science is. You do not need to experiment/observe using logic. Just like you don't in math. But math is very useful in science, as is logic.

[pgardn]

Gee, I wish I had specifically said "university professor." Oh, wait; I fucking did! You're seriously a fucking tool.

Yes you did.

And I seriously said, your JC teacher.
Ya Fckn hoser.

[Spurtacular]

Not it would not. Because Chemistry and Physics both use observation and experimentation. So your statement again shows a misunderstanding of what science is. You do not need to experiment/observe using logic. Just like you don't in math. But math is very useful in science, as is logic.

You know you could have done a google search and figured this out already? I suspect you already have and are holding onto this so tightly b/c of the gray area you think you've found; but yea, I'll give more credence to highly trained logics teacher than to your half-ass opinion.

Literally, many people have book titles that call logic a science.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=logic+science

[pgardn]

You know you could have done a google search and figured this out already? I suspect you already have and are holding onto this so tightly b/c of the gray area you think you've found; but yea, I'll give more credence to highly trained logics teacher than to your half-ass opinion.

Literally, many people have book titles that call logic a science.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=logic+science

Excellent. Your Google searches are part of your problem.

There are all kinds of titles on books.
Logic is NOT a science. Your logic teacher was not trained in science. I am and continue to be everyday. I have not looked up a thing so far I don't need to. Il bet your teacher/titles used the term because he thought it carried more weight. Well the opposite is most likely true. Logic is more fundamental than science just like math is.

Explain to me what science is and how it works and you will see how you are wrong. Do a google search on what science is.

Jeez. I saw a book called The Evolution of The Car. Oh gray areas... You would never use gray areas in your argument. Go back and read how this started.

[Spurtacular]

Excellent. Your Google searches are part of your problem.

There are all kinds of titles on books.
Logic is NOT a science. Your logic teacher was not trained in science. I am and continue to be everyday.

Explain to me what science is and how it works and you will see how you are wrong. Do a google search on what science is.

Jeez. I saw a book called The Evolution of The Car. Oh gray areas... You would never use gray areas in your argument. Go back and read how this started.

I hadn't realized you had went over my professor's resume to say what he is trained or not trained in. :nope

What is your branch of science that you claim to be trained in?

And your summation of the link is obviously disingenous unless Amazon somehow gives you different results through your IP (which I doubt). Name the top five books listed if you want to make that an issue.

[pgardn]

I hadn't realized you had went over my professor's resume to say what he is trained or not trained in. :nope

What is your branch of science that you claim to be trained in?

And your summation of the link is obviously disingenous unless Amazon somehow gives you different results through your IP (which I doubt). Name the top five books listed if you want to make that an issue.

I don't care what his resume is. He is not using the word properly. I did not even look at the link. I already posited to you book titles can say almost anything. It does not mean they used the practice of science correctly.

Do you want me to give you another definition of science again so you can again see the difference I have explained. What is science by your understanding?

[Spurtacular]

This is how terribly you argue at times.


I did not even look at the link.


Jeez. I saw a book called The Evolution of The Car. Oh gray areas...

[pgardn]

Biochemistry.

But I read more basic Physics when not working.

What is your background in Science?

[pgardn]

This is how terribly you argue at times.

Yes I did see a book called The Evolution of The Car.
WTF does this have to do with anything besides how people use words that are really not correct in titles?

[Spurtacular]

It does not mean they used the practice of science correctly....

Do you want me to give you another definition of science again so you can again see the difference I have explained. What is science by your understanding?

I'm not a scientist, but I would doubt even all scientists even have come to a consensus on the definition of science. Granted, I would imagine there is something of a normative answer(s). What is your branch of science?

[Spurtacular]

Yes I did see a book called The Evolution of The Car.
WTF does this have to do with anything besides how people use words that are really not correct in titles?

You can't mock the link based upon seeing it and also say you didn't see the link. That's called a scientific impossibility, Mr. Science. Or should I not call it that b/c I didn't use the scientific method? (A cheap way to define science, btw :lmao).

[pgardn]

You know you could have done a google search and figured this out already? I suspect you already have and are holding onto this so tightly b/c of the gray area you think you've found; but yea, I'll give more credence to highly trained logics teacher than to your half-ass opinion.

Literally, many people have book titles that call logic a science.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=logic+science

Oh I can't... mock something I have not seen.

So what does the underlined say?
Dumbass...

[Spurtacular]

Biochemistry.

But I read more basic Physics when not working.

What is your background in Science?

Well, you have a narrowly defined view of science. That's your prerogative. I've pointed out the concept held by many in academia consider logic to be a science. And I agree as it follows a structure akin to scientific processes.

[pgardn]

You can't mock the link based upon seeing it and also say you didn't see the link. That's called a scientific impossibility, Mr. Science. Or should I not call it that b/c I didn't use the scientific method? (A cheap way to define science, btw :lmao).

Should I now use an emoticon laughing on the ground rolling or just the acronym?

Fck the scientific method. It's a silly general guideline... Dr. Logic Scientist

[Spurtacular]

Oh I can't... mock something I have not seen.

So what does the underlined say?
Dumbass...

Bro, you mocked shit in the list and then said you didn't see the list. This isn't hard shit. One wonders what quality of scientist you could possibly be if you can't get this.

[Pavlov]

Must be a science!


http://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9780916360634_p0_v1_s1200x630.jpg

[Spurtacular]

Should I now use an emoticon laughing on the ground rolling or just the acronym?

Fck the scientific method. It's a silly general guideline... Dr. Logic Scientist

You would do well to consider logic a science. It would help refine your argumentation into more fruitful pursuits.

[pgardn]

Well, you have a narrowly defined view of science. That's your prerogative. I've pointed out the concept held by many in academia consider logic to be a science. And I agree as it follows a structure akin to scientific processes.

Just shut the fuck up why don't you then.
You take a class where people tell you logic is a science and then you back out after having it explained to you.
My professor... I don't give a Fck. It's incorrect and now you see it. You think you can just bluff through things. Well, you can't.

[pgardn]

Bro, you mocked shit in the list and then said you didn't see the list. This isn't hard shit. One wonders what quality of scientist you could possibly be if you can't get this.

Bro

You Fckn told me what the list was. Read the underlined again.
I never claimed to look at it, I did not need to.

[pgardn]

You would do well to consider logic a science. It would help refine your argumentation into more fruitful pursuits.

After all this crap you think I would take your opinion seriously...?

Good Christ...

[Spurtacular]

Just shut the fuck up why don't you then.
You take a class where people tell you logic is a science and then you back out after having it explained to you.
My professor... I don't give a Fck. It's incorrect and now you see it. You think you can just bluff through things. Well, you can't.

I haven't backed out of anything, dude. I agree that logic is a science. All sciences follow strong rigors; logic is no exception.

[Spurtacular]

After all this crap you think I would take your opinion seriously...?

Good Christ...

You're spazzing much. This hardly tends to be the reaction of someone secure in his outlook.

[pgardn]

You're spazzing much. This hardly tends to be the reaction of someone secure in his outlook.

No.

Its an opinion of a man wasting his time with a hardhead catfish.

almost forgot...

Bro.

[Spurtacular]

Bro

You Fckn told me what the list was. Read the underlined again.
I never claimed to look at it, I did not need to.

I linked a list of books. This was your response:
Jeez. I saw a book called The Evolution of The Car.

[pgardn]

I haven't backed out of anything, dude. I agree that logic is a science. All sciences follow strong rigors; logic is no exception.

Sciences are unique because they use observation and experimentation. Science is wider in scope than logic. Logic is the backbone of what allows humans to make sense of what they observe and fiddle around with. Math allows even more power in that it allows science to be predictive. We know where the moon is right now. Observation, analysis of observations, logic, and then the appropriate math models allow us to know.

Its not that difficult. I feel bound by public service to help in this time of crisis.

[Spurtacular]

No.

Its an opinion of a man wasting his time with a hardhead catfish.

almost forgot...

Bro.

Well, you can hold to your fourth-grade definition of science if it suits you. But that many academics consider the quite rigorous practice of logic to be a science is not a hidden secret. The fact that you're just hearing of this speaks to your own narrow mindedness.

[pgardn]

I linked a list of books. This was your response:

You labeled the list. You told me. You down what the list contained for gosh sakes. Get it?
And then I remembered a title much like Palov posted.
Again, not a great mystery or diversionary tactic you think you have come upon.

[Spurtacular]

Sciences are unique because they use observation and experimentation. Science is wider in scope than logic. Logic is the backbone of what allows humans to make sense of what they observe and fiddle around with. Math allows even more power in that it allows science to be predictive. We know where the moon is right now. Observation, analysis of observations, logic, and then the appropriate math models allow us to know.


In essence, you've listed but one definition of science.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science

[pgardn]

Well, you can hold to your fourth-grade definition of science if it suits you. But that many academics consider the quite rigorous practice of logic to be a science is not a hidden secret. The fact that you're just hearing of this speaks to your own narrow mindedness.

Post #76

You won't find any scientist that would call this post 4th grade level or a decent basic summary of what science is.

[Spurtacular]

You labeled the list. You told me. You down what the list contained for gosh sakes. Get it?
And then I remembered a title much like Palov posted.
Again, not a great mystery or diversionary tactic you think you have come upon.

I listed a link of books to just give a general idea of how logic is considered science. There's nothing diversionary about that, whatsoever.

[Spurtacular]

Post #76

You won't find any scientist that would call this post 4th grade level or a decent basic summary.

Pretty much verbatim, that's how grade-school teachers tend to explain science; that it's based upon the scientific model, etc.

[pgardn]

I listed a link of books to just give a general idea of how logic is considered science. There's nothing diversionary about that, whatsoever.

I did not say it was diversionary on your part.

I said you telling me what was in the list and then your apparent failure to recognize a perfectly innocent reply was not diversionary on my part and that you had not uncovered an inconsistency like you thought you had. You told me what was in the list yourself. Then I remembered a title that was inaccurate from a Biological perspective. No big deal. I still have not looked at the link. It really does not matter at this point.

[Spurtacular]

I did not say it was diversionary on your part.

I said you telling me what was in the list and then your apparent failure to recognize a perfectly innocent reply was not diversionary on my part and that you had not uncovered an inconsistency like you thought you had. You told me what was in the list yourself. Then I remembered a title that was inaccurate from a Biological perspective. No big deal. I still have not looked at the link. It really does not matter at this point.

I agree that it doesn't matter at this point; so, you'll excuse me if that is the extent of this post.

[Spurtacular]

pgardn

Would suggest you listen to this. You can disagree if you still wish; but semi-respectfully, this Hegel guy is a helluva lot smarter than you:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8CFD9T8H0

[DMC]

Regardless whether logic is a science or not, most of the people on this forum have no idea how logic applies in a discussion. They ignore premise and just go straight to conclusion then call the conclusion illogical because they disagree with it, but not because the argument fails logically. That happens way too often here, and it just shows that too many folks have ignored philosophy and gotten their education on forums, in tidbits, and misunderstand application.

[Spurtacular]

Regardless whether logic is a science or not, most of the people on this forum have no idea how logic applies in a discussion. They ignore premise and just go straight to conclusion then call the conclusion illogical because they disagree with it, but not because the argument fails logically. That happens way too often here, and it just shows that too many folks have ignored philosophy and gotten their education on forums, in tidbits, and misunderstand application.

Basically my point. Logic is a very strict formal science or process. People would be bored as sh** if they actually had to follow the rigors of logic. It's one thing to use the term logic colloquially or even sparingly broach the subject on some occasions (particularly in cases of quite abhorrent lack of logic); but these nitwits who get their ire up when spouting off about logic are dumb as fuck for even presuming a message board is the place for logic to be rigorously followed.

[DMC]

Basically my point. Logic is a very strict formal science or process. People would be bored as sh** if they actually had to follow the rigors of logic. It's one thing to use the term logic colloquially or even sparingly broach the subject on some occasions (particularly in cases of quite abhorrent lack of logic); but these nitwits who get their ire up when spouting off about logic are dumb as fuck for even presuming a message board is the place for logic to be rigorously followed.

You'll rarely see a logical argument made here, but you'll see a shit ton of accusations of logical fallacies.

[pgardn]

pgardn (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=19184)

Would suggest you listen to this. You can disagree if you still wish; but semi-respectfully, this Hegel guy is a helluva lot smarter than you:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8CFD9T8H0

Just because I do science does not mean I'm smart.
Im smart enough to know this.
But I would say I'm curious.

I dont even know what smart really means. There are people who can memorize a lot of information and retrieve it easily but don't know when they have stumbled upon something I find very interesting. I know that. I imagine others have experienced the same. I know there are people that can imitate another person after a few days or even draw them. I can't. So... on it goes.

[Spurtacular]

Just because I do science does not mean I'm smart.
Im smart enough to know this.
But I would say I'm curious.

I dont even know what smart really means. There are people who can memorize a lot of information and retrieve it easily but don't know when they have stumbled upon something I find very interesting. I know that. I imagine others have experienced the same. I know there are people that can imitate another person after a few days or even draw them. I can't. So... on it goes.

Well, that's humble of you. Many scientists feel like they have to be the smartest guy in the room.

[pgardn]

Well, that's humble of you. Many scientists feel like they have to be the smartest guy in the room.

Ok.

Then ask them to say the alphabet backwards skipping 1 letter, then two, then 3. Memorize it yourself and humble them I guess. I have not had your experience. There is no time for that.
I must deal with people thru cooperation and understanding different talents. And be able to spot BS. Because being wrong matters. Communicating effectively and personally in what we believe to be true concerning a specific phenomena is absolutely necessary. Free people need to think about this.

[da_suns_fan]

I cant believe these two have been going on for three pages on whether or not logic is a "science".

Its just a word.

Ive never heard the phrase "science of logic" or "logic science" used before and I had to build a microprocessor using and/not/or/nand gates. However, almost anything can be considered a "science" if you simply use the word to describe "the study of...X" and a lot of people do.

In my view, a science is something in the natural world we run experiments on and make predictions about.

In Chemistry, we run experiments and make predictions about chemical interactions etc. That definition fits for Physics, Astronomy, Biology...

In that sense of the word, "logic" wouldnt really be a science, but that also would mean "political science", "computer science", "social science", "economic science" etc are really sciences either.

[Blake]

That's never been my position, JV Chump.

It's pretty clear that's what you'd like to have happen.

You get so sensitive and defensive when people ask you to back up your claims.

[Blake]

Well, you have a narrowly defined view of science. That's your prerogative. I've pointed out the concept held by many in academia consider logic to be a science. And I agree as it follows a structure akin to scientific processes.

Are there colleges that let you earn a BS in Logic?

[Blake]

Regardless whether logic is a science or not, most of the people on this forum have no idea how logic applies in a discussion. They ignore premise and just go straight to conclusion then call the conclusion illogical because they disagree with it, but not because the argument fails logically. That happens way too often here, and it just shows that too many folks have ignored philosophy and gotten their education on forums, in tidbits, and misunderstand application.

The irony. It drips.

[TeyshaBlue]

Drips? Its so rock-hard I can walk on it. :lol

[Blake]

Drips like limestone I guess

[TimDunkem]

:lol

[pgardn]

I cant believe these two have been going on for three pages on whether or not logic is a "science".

Its just a word.

Ive never heard the phrase "science of logic" or "logic science" used before and I had to build a microprocessor using and/not/or/nand gates. However, almost anything can be considered a "science" if you simply use the word to describe "the study of...X" and a lot of people do.

In my view, a science is something in the natural world we run experiments on and make predictions about.

In Chemistry, we run experiments and make predictions about chemical interactions etc. That definition fits for Physics, Astronomy, Biology...

In that sense of the word, "logic" wouldnt really be a science, but that also would mean "political science", "computer science", "social science", "economic science" etc are really sciences either.


In the others you listed you can make observations, gather polls. Etc... So in that sense they can be examined but it's understood that the conclusions drawn are very tenuous, so I'm fine. We understand they are not well controlled, measurement is very difficult etc... In logic gates the electrical mechanisms that allow "logic" gates to work could be studied. But pure logic is simply a very convenient way of reasoning. It's a much more fundamental than science just like math. Logic is a part of doing good science. This is all I was trying to say.

So yeah.
3 pages... I've seen worse but yep, too much.

[pgardn]

Are there colleges that let you earn a BS in Logic?

That would most likely come under the Umbrella of Philosophy I'm guessing. The logic courses at UT were done thru the Philosophy dept, I would think it was the same at TTU.

[Blake]

That would most likely come under the Umbrella of Philosophy I'm guessing. The logic courses at UT were done thru the Philosophy dept, I would think it was the same at TTU.

I haven't looked it up but BA in philosophy I'm betting with some kind of Logic as a requirement

[DMC]

The irony. It drips.

Just like your ex-wife's pussy.

[ducks]

http://tribunist.com/news/former-army-ranger-only-steelers-player-who-stands-for-anthem-video/?utm_source=CDH

[Blake]

http://tribunist.com/news/former-army-ranger-only-steelers-player-who-stands-for-anthem-video/?utm_source=CDH


I like that guy. I think he's on the USAA ads

[ducks]

Cowboys' Jerry Jones: Anthem 'Not the Place' to Stage Protest

[Spurtacular]

I haven't looked it up but BA in philosophy I'm betting with some kind of Logic as a requirement
pgardn made good points. I respect his p.o.v. on this. It doesn't change that many in academia consider logic to be a science as I've shown. Either way, this debate has ran its course.

[ducks]

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/21766746_1489870721061800_5157390578843516732_n.jp g?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=345f3062b4e939a0623f8aa8337527d6&oe=5A54EBA0

[Pavlov]

https://scontent-lax3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/21766746_1489870721061800_5157390578843516732_n.jp g?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=345f3062b4e939a0623f8aa8337527d6&oe=5A54EBA0Fake.

[Blake]

pgardn made good points. I respect his p.o.v. on this. It doesn't change that many in academia consider logic to be a science as I've shown. Either way, this debate has ran its course.

Your white flag is noted

[Spurtacular]

Your white flag is noted

Nice try, JV Chump.

[Blake]

Nice try, JV Chump.

K, what university hands out BS degrees in logic?