Awesome as usual....![]()
![]()
So you agree with the premise but not the explanation? xd
Explanations= set of assumptions/premises.
Well not necessarily since in logic a premise is a proposition, the explanation is the exposition.![]()
So you agree with the premise but not the explanation? xd
Now we bear the grounds of subjectivity; I forget you are not me, and as such, your details are different.
To note of you, a premise in the context I referred to, were identified to be a statement, premise, assumption...etc etc.
In echo, your title is the premise, which is what I was grinding at, but, since you are not me, you seem to have view something else, hence stated as a explanation. Though, I should have tread carefully with the 'explanation.'
The mere fact that your initially response prose a question indicates uncertainty does it not?
Surely you can solve for the rest...
Well, not all propositional logic follows Modus tollens, and my uncertainty arises from the point you were actually trying to convey, afterall, you said it yourself "you're not me" I was simply stating Aristotelian logic, that a logical premise is not the exposition or the argument that justifies the conclusion itself, but rather, a logical premise is the assumption of the truth of a proposition and through exposition that would justify the conclusion.
Aaand were done.
Didn't you study logic in college? it's very basic![]()
Well, not all propositional logic follows Modus tollens, and my uncertainty arises from the point you were actually trying to convey, afterall, you said it yourself "you're not me" I was simply stating Aristotelian logic, that a logical premise is not the exposition or the argument that justifies the conclusion itself, but rather, a logical premise is the assumption of the truth of a proposition and through exposition that would justify the conclusion.
*Sigh*
Which is why I said bearing subjectivity....
Thus; aand we're done...I thought or think you are a resourceful member to say the least. 'solve' for my stated response/belief opposed to your initially depiction: your're a bit vacuous.
Nice theory mate!
Initial depiction.tbh your grammar is running amok, if you're trying to sound intelligent, don't, I can easily see through people's intellectual deficiencies.
![]()
ITs a manga.. no need to take it all serious about grammer and proposing real life theories or laws into it...
Nice theory man but the thing is why Obito cannot unlock the rinnegan, why Madara unlocked it after many decades of implanting senju DNA? Does senju Dna really makes the rinnengan awake?
That is the confusion, or else only the ones who have used susanoo can unlock rinnegan???
What applies to Madara doesn't necessarily apply to Obito, and I don't think that in any dialogue Madara gave any hint that Obito could unlock the Rinnegan himself, even for the sake of argument we assume Madara was referring to Obito's potential of awakening the Rinnegan in that panel, why would he verbalize hesitation of Obito's capacity to awaken it "even if you don't awaken the Rinnegan" instead of "Even if you don't immediately awaken the Rinnegan" if it was really just senju+uchiha dna that's all that's needed to unlock it.
You must be registered for see images
SOON EVERYONE WILL HAVE TO FACE THE INHERENT TRUTH
Sage(Uzumaki) + Juubi = Senju & Uchiha Ancestors
Uchiha take more characteristics from the juubi while the Senju take more characteristics from the sage himself.
This is why Naruto has the sages silhouette shroud.
He himself is already an uzumaki which subsides the need for senju dna and having all the chakra of every tailed beast subverts his need for uchiha dna.Right now Naruto is the closest to the sage since he inhibits all the chakra the sage had.