Forum for Large Handicap Games Discussion
The fallacy of the consequent [#1411]
From the page: "6. Play fast games. It is my experience that people who dislike fast games, tend to remain weak."
This doesn't make sense. If the fact that they dislike fast games is what makes them weak, it will not help to play fast games.
If people like fast games in the first place, they will play fast games anyways.
If happy people like to sing, it does not mean that sad people will get happy by singing. It does not mean that it is impossible that some sad people will get happy by singing either, just beware of the false reverse logical connections.
Actually, this is the fallacy of the consequent: ![[ext]](images/extlink.gif)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_Consequent
--trontonic
You're treating the English language too formally!
Try this version:
"People who dislike fast games tend not to play a lot of fast games. It's important to play fast games to become strong. If you don't play many fast games you won't become strong. Therefore people who dislike fast games tend to remain weak."
It's a clumsy and painful style of English expression. Therefore the original author gave a shorter version, assuming that an intelligent reader could fill in the gaps.
Dieter is still around, and can speak for himself.
However, I think that Dieter offered his experience not as proof, but as evidence. There is a difference, and it is big in terms of logic. Evidence is never logical proof. It aims not at certainty, but at belief. Belief has degrees. Evidence tends to alter the degree of belief.
I think that this evidence is very weak, but that's another question.
Funny, I read the comment and did not realize it was about a statement of mine.
First of all, I wrote this a long time ago, somewhere at the beginning of SL. I am much less opinionated these days on the necessary and sufficient conditions to improve at Go.
Secondly however, as a mathematician I cannot allow myself being accused of a logical fallacy, and certainly not inverting the causal arrow! But after examining the statement, I must admit I did! Indeed if the statement "People who dislike fast games tend to remain weak" is a causal statement, rephrased as "if you dislike fast games, then you will remain weak" then the fallacy of the consequent reads "if you remain weak, then you dislike fast games", or its converse, "if you like fast games, then you will become strong".
Good point.
Now if we look at it from another angle, as a correlation rather than a causality, then advising to play fast games to improve your chances to become strong, is statistically sound.
![[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]](images/stone-hello.png "Sensei's Library")