Broomsticks And Owls

by **Gwared** » Thursday 7 August 2003 7:01:18pm

Reads all detatched posts and notes that the sentence structure is confusing and hinders the point which is trying to be shown. i.e the grammar confuses which meaning is implied.

If you are having a go at me, I am not yet sure why (not in the fact that I abhor criticism but that I did not understand your critique), I am male.

Also the reason that my answer was phrased as such was that I noted the foul thing first but decided to double check that it was indeed the first would cup. I could not be bothered to rearrange the sentence as the meaning was clear.

by **Ju-DedoH** » Thursday 7 August 2003 7:38:35pm

well I understand, but it seems more mathematical than philosophical to me

by **2F2Type_R** » Friday 8 August 2003 1:02:24am

cool! someone understands :grin:

Yeah feels like that to me too
could say logic's like doing maths using sentences

my favourite was ethics (human conduct and the nature of right and wrong).
some of the stuff people said 500 years ago can still be applied today, which floored me again.heheh

by **Gwared** » Friday 8 August 2003 5:13:09pm

2F2Type_R wrote:some of the stuff people said 500 years ago can still be applied today, which floored me again.heheh

You find that suprising? Humans make the same mistakes over, and over again.

As an aside, Singer's comments aren't differcult...they form the basis for a brand of questions now commonly used in IQ tests, eg;

If some Zorgs are Snarls and all Snarls are Quarks then some Quarks are definately Zorgs, True or False?...etc.

by **2F2Type_R** » Saturday 9 August 2003 8:58:13am

Gwared wrote:You find that suprising?

No, impressed because at the time our lecturer only handed out the 2 conclusions and asked us to pick out the one that is valid, and the one that isn't. They're obviously both true, there's no denying it. But out of the two you can pick out a false

which was really trippy :lol:

Gwared wrote:Humans make the same mistakes over, and over again.

I don't think its related in that sort of way

Gwared wrote:As an aside, Singer's comments aren't differcult...they form the basis for a brand of questions now commonly used in IQ tests, eg;

If some Zorgs are Snarls and all Snarls are Quarks then some Quarks are definately Zorgs, True or False?...etc.

lol... no no, not like that... but yeah, that's a nice question

by **2F2Type_R** » Saturday 9 August 2003 9:04:15am

btw. when does the next quiz start??
no idea how many times we've set the quiz [o_O]

as i understand it... umm.... questions that houses get wrong earn the quizmakers 2 points? (bonus = 4)

means the maker can get a total of... 30 points??
or am i utterly stupid? :razz:

by **Friar Tuck** » Saturday 9 August 2003 1:42:11pm

We're still choosing. That patience you've shown waiting for our quiz, you may want to apply here. It won't[hopefully] take as much time as the quiz.

by **hoopsmaster88** » Saturday 9 August 2003 2:35:01pm

i'm pretty sure we've decided, so i think one of our prefects will post who makes the next one today.

by **gecko** » Saturday 9 August 2003 4:33:20pm

Yep, we're waiting till after this weekend to announce it, as some Ravenclaws might log in only during the weekend, and we want to give them a chance to vote too! Thanks for waiting !

by **Paul** » Saturday 9 August 2003 5:05:27pm

True - I think (about the Zargs and quarks thingy), 2f2. :-)

The points scenario with the 4 bonus points for 1 question and and 4 questions at 2 points each, gives a total possible score of 36 for the House setting the quiz. This is (2 points x 4 questions x 3 other houses) + (4 point x 1 question x 3 other houses). The number of questions, points and bonus can vary, but this was the possible total available in the last quiz.