01-10-2014, 09:18 AM
The conclusion you've reached is invalid due to conflicting premises. Now what should be said in regards to logic (as people on the internet do enjoy using words they don't know the meaning of) is that "invalid" in the context of logic does not mean "wrong" just that the premises do not definitively lead to the conclusion (deductive) or that the conclusion is drawn from the premises (inductive).
To sum up, your argument doesn't make sense, the individual points that are supposed to support each other and the conclusion just don't.
Within the scope of what we know comprises of the archetypes the proposal contradicts, plain and simple.
Now, I may be a bit incoherent atm as I am breaking down a fair bit of foreign at the moment toxin (bite from a fang, how bout that?) but hopefully this is on track and if not I'll rectify it in a few days.
To sum up, your argument doesn't make sense, the individual points that are supposed to support each other and the conclusion just don't.
Within the scope of what we know comprises of the archetypes the proposal contradicts, plain and simple.
Now, I may be a bit incoherent atm as I am breaking down a fair bit of foreign at the moment toxin (bite from a fang, how bout that?) but hopefully this is on track and if not I'll rectify it in a few days.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)