- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Rant logic
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:36 am
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:36 am
There are many logic systems we use to solve problems. Deductive logic links premises with conclusions. Inductive logic links premises with probable outcomes.
And then you have rant logic, a logic system which is paradoxical in that premises are mis-used to reach whatever conclusion the rant-er is predisposed to want to think is true. In that sense, rant logic is unique to other logic systems because it is not so much about what is true as it is what one wants to be true.
Examples of rant logic:
Jacob Hester was a two star. Ryan Perrilloux was a five star. Jacob Hester was a better football player than Perrilloux. Therefore all two stars are better than all five stars.
Drew Brees is short. Jamarcus Russell is tall. Brees is better than Russell. LSU should recruit short quaterbacks.
Roosters crow in my yard in the morning. The sun comes up every time my roosters crow. My roosters make the sun come up.
Jimbo Fisher won six games this year. Ed Orgeron won 9 games this year. Orgeron is a better coach than Fisher.
Julia Roberts slept with Lyle Lovett. I am better looking than Lyle Lovett. Given the chance, Julia Roberts would sleep with me.
Darren Sproles is small and shifty. Pooka Williams is small and shifty. Pooka is the next Sproles.
Malachi Dupre went pro early. Malachi Dupre didn't make the pros. Dante Jackson would be dumb to go pro now.
Trey Quinn dropped a pass in the Alabama game. The Alabama game was a big game. Trey Quinn cant catch passes in big games.
These are the things that make rant logic superior to any logic system developed by Aristotle, Plato or Socrates. Rant logic is more flexible in that it is not constrained by what might probably be true.
With rant logic you start out with the conclusion that you think is correct and use select facts or premises to support your conclusion. The most important component of rant logic is learning how to ignore or not consider facts that might support an opposite conclusion.
Rant logic is the superior logic system because using rant logic, one can never be wrong.
And then you have rant logic, a logic system which is paradoxical in that premises are mis-used to reach whatever conclusion the rant-er is predisposed to want to think is true. In that sense, rant logic is unique to other logic systems because it is not so much about what is true as it is what one wants to be true.
Examples of rant logic:
Jacob Hester was a two star. Ryan Perrilloux was a five star. Jacob Hester was a better football player than Perrilloux. Therefore all two stars are better than all five stars.
Drew Brees is short. Jamarcus Russell is tall. Brees is better than Russell. LSU should recruit short quaterbacks.
Roosters crow in my yard in the morning. The sun comes up every time my roosters crow. My roosters make the sun come up.
Jimbo Fisher won six games this year. Ed Orgeron won 9 games this year. Orgeron is a better coach than Fisher.
Julia Roberts slept with Lyle Lovett. I am better looking than Lyle Lovett. Given the chance, Julia Roberts would sleep with me.
Darren Sproles is small and shifty. Pooka Williams is small and shifty. Pooka is the next Sproles.
Malachi Dupre went pro early. Malachi Dupre didn't make the pros. Dante Jackson would be dumb to go pro now.
Trey Quinn dropped a pass in the Alabama game. The Alabama game was a big game. Trey Quinn cant catch passes in big games.
These are the things that make rant logic superior to any logic system developed by Aristotle, Plato or Socrates. Rant logic is more flexible in that it is not constrained by what might probably be true.
With rant logic you start out with the conclusion that you think is correct and use select facts or premises to support your conclusion. The most important component of rant logic is learning how to ignore or not consider facts that might support an opposite conclusion.
Rant logic is the superior logic system because using rant logic, one can never be wrong.
13
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:39 am to paper tiger
Or you could just say it's a joke.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:44 am to paper tiger
quote:
Jimbo Fisher won six games this year. Ed Orgeron won 9 games this year. Orgeron is a better coach than Fisher.
Yeah, It frightens me that people that think like this are allowed to operate motor vehicles.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:44 am to paper tiger
Orgeron won more games than Nick Saban did at each's 2nd SEC school during their first season as coach.
O >>> Saban
O >>> Saban
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:50 am to paper tiger
I use deductive logic in just about everything, yet when I engage in a logical exercise on this website I usually get major backlash.
I attribute this to the inability of people to separate their emotions from their reasoning. Their heart from their brain. My experiences IRL here in LA tell me that this problem is especially bad here. You see it in everything from the classifieds(CL, LA Sportsman, etc.) to driving.
I attribute this to the inability of people to separate their emotions from their reasoning. Their heart from their brain. My experiences IRL here in LA tell me that this problem is especially bad here. You see it in everything from the classifieds(CL, LA Sportsman, etc.) to driving.
This post was edited on 12/8/17 at 10:51 am
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:51 am to Bottom9
In short, the OP is saying is that nimrods are overly reliant on anecdotal evidence, especially when the larger body of work doesn't support what they want it to.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:52 am to Goldrush25
quote:
Yeah, It frightens me that people that think like this are allowed to operate motor vehicles.
I was not a fan of the Orgeron hire. Based on their overall records, Fisher would be seen by most objective outsiders as being the better coach.
That said, what happened in the past is not always a perfect predictor of what happens in the future. They will have some head to head match-ups coming up. Orgeron will have the chance to prove himself. I don't rule out the fact O might outcoach him in the future.
But yes, you cant draw ultimate conclusions based on one season of comparison as many on here do.
It cuts both ways. You cannot conclude O will not be a good coach at LSU just because he struggled at Ole Miss. His more recent body of work at USC and now at LSU has been pretty good.
This post was edited on 12/8/17 at 11:04 am
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:55 am to Goldrush25
quote:
In short, the OP is saying is that nimrods are overly reliant on anecdotal evidence, especially when the larger body of work doesn't support what they want it to.
Well crap. You said in one sentence what it took me many sentences to say. Way to make me look bad dude.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:55 am to paper tiger
Lots of cherry pickers hang out on this board.
Fun part is that if you don't believe or agree with their resulting logic, you get called a lot of names I haven't heard since grade school.
Fun part is that if you don't believe or agree with their resulting logic, you get called a lot of names I haven't heard since grade school.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 10:56 am to paper tiger
So basically nobody knows anything and any attempt to draw conclusions is ill advised? Give us an example of a sound logical conclusion related to LSU football.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:02 am to TheWalrus
quote:
So basically nobody knows anything and any attempt to draw conclusions is ill advised? Give us an example of a sound logical conclusion related to LSU football.
I'll take a shot.
Over the past ten years LSU has recruited more five star and four star players than Ole Miss, Miss State and Arkansas. Over the past ten years LSU on average has outperformed Ole Miss, Miss State and Arkansas and has sent more players to the pros.
Therefore, on average and over a long sample size of games, a team built with 4 and 5 star recruits will outperform a team built with 3 star players.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:09 am to paper tiger
Good stuff
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:13 am to paper tiger
Well Wisconsin has performed a lot better than Texas A&M or Michigan the last ten years with vastly inferior recruiting rankings.
You are setting an arbitrary bar for how much is needed to support a conclusion.
The only difference between rant logic and your logic is a few more years of evidence. Maybe we should require a statistical analysis from university professors to draw the conclusion more stars equals more wins.
You just said past performance is not indicative of future results. Maybe LSU’s success is a fluke.
You are setting an arbitrary bar for how much is needed to support a conclusion.
The only difference between rant logic and your logic is a few more years of evidence. Maybe we should require a statistical analysis from university professors to draw the conclusion more stars equals more wins.
You just said past performance is not indicative of future results. Maybe LSU’s success is a fluke.
This post was edited on 12/8/17 at 11:16 am
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:15 am to paper tiger
quote:
That said, what happened in the past is not always a perfect predictor of what happens in the future. They will have some head to head match-ups coming up. Orgeron will have the chance to prove himself. I don't rule out the fact O might outcoach him in the future.
Past performance is the strongest indicator we have of future performance. There's not an absolute correlation, true. Most coaches do improve, but it's not in a vaccum. His contemporaries are improving as well, so what's the absolute value we've gained with hiring Orgeron?
quote:
It cuts both ways. You cannot conclude O will not be a good coach at LSU just because he struggled at Ole Miss. His more recent body of work at USC and now at LSU has been pretty good.
I can conclude he is what his record says he is. He's not someone that's gone anywhere and improved a team's performance relative to what it was before he got there. My contention was never that he would bring LSU down to the level of a 3-win OM team. I've just maintained that he doesn't have what it takes to improve a team's trajectory. When he does that then we can begin to have a different conversation.
This post was edited on 12/8/17 at 11:17 am
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:17 am to paper tiger
That's actually pretty good.
Except Orgeron may be a better coach than Fisher in the long run.
Except Orgeron may be a better coach than Fisher in the long run.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:26 am to Goldrush25
quote:
His contemporaries are improving as well,
Way to help the OP make his point.
How are his contemporaries improving?
Is this like when A&M hired Kevin Sumlin? A guy who had gone 13-1 at Houston the year he was hired. He was the first Tom Herman but better, winning 13 games his final season.
Is this also like when Arkansas hired Bret Bielema? He had won the Big 10 three seasons in a row right before going to Arkansas.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:27 am to paper tiger
You put too much thought into this post.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:30 am to Bottom9
Ed Orgeron likes Cole slaw more than fries. Since fries come from FRANCE and all people from FRANCE are pansies, Ed Orgeron is clearly a better coach than Nick Saban, Led Miles, Urban Meyer and Jumbo Fisher because cabbage doesn't grow in France and those coaches like fries better than slaw.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:36 am to TheWalrus
quote:
Well Wisconsin has performed a lot better than Texas A&M or Michigan the last ten years with vastly inferior recruiting rankings. You are setting an arbitrary bar for how much is needed to support a conclusion. The only difference between rant logic and your logic is a few more years of evidence. Maybe we should require a statistical analysis from university professors to draw the conclusion more stars equals more wins. You just said past performance is not indicative of future results. Maybe LSU’s success is a fluke.
I think you are taking my post way too seriously. Its a message board and I am not remotely implying people shouldn't have and share opinions.
It was just a commentary about how on messaged boards in general people can be very reactionary and jump to conclusions. That can be human nature.
A good example is the Wisconsin example your point to. Wisconsin is an exception to the rule, not the rule. And even so, they have never been in the finals which have been dominated by teams that have done well in recruiting rankings.
Put on a player level, the fact 4 star and 5 star players on average are better than 3 star players, doesn't mean that we will not find three star players that are lower ranked than they should be.
I don't dismiss a three star player LSU gets as being bad, as some do. But if LSU ends up with a class of mostly three star players, that would concern me.
Posted on 12/8/17 at 11:36 am to paper tiger
19-28 is O’s coaching record. That’s not logic, that’s fact.
You can use past performance to predict future results. Look at stocks...
You can use past performance to predict future results. Look at stocks...
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News