A more direct example:
I say: "You can only do that if I say so." My kid says: "You just said so!" That's the logic of a first grader, but it's not actually how conditionals work in common English. On Fri, 15 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > True but my argument was this: > We got > A: "CAN Y if X is true" > where X is: > X: "CAN Y exists as text" (for. "doing so is specified by a rule", where "so" > is "The Treasuror CAN cause Agora to pay any player or organization by > announcement". " is specified by a rule" is pretty much > "exists as text" because all rules are specifications of something. If they > weren't specifying anything they would be pretty useless, annoying rules lol > like aeijqwornjqwhwquiejh qwuih qiuwq ui.) > > So A is basically: "CAN Y if "CAN Y exists as text" is true". Since CAN Y > does exist as text, then we can CAN Y. > > On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > The statement "CAN Y if X is true" doesn't make X true. > > On Fri, 15 Sep 2017, Cuddle Beam wrote: > > > I create the following proposal and pend it with AP: > > > > -----+----- > > > > Title: Anti-Treasuror Omnipotence > > AI: 3 > > Content: > > > > Amend "The Treasuror CAN cause Agora to pay any player or > organization by announcement if doing so is specified by a rule." > > > > to > > > > "The Treasuror CAN cause Agora to pay any player by announcement if > doing so is specified by a rule other than this rule." > > > > -----+----- > > > > You see: > > - Organizations don't exist anymore, they got repealed by "Better > Accounting". Removing that. > > - "doing so" is specified by the sentence itself where that's in (any > description is a specification of itself), so adding "by a rule other than > this rule" to avoid that. > > > > > > > >
