Are these two statements logically equivalent?

Post Reply New Topic

No. Now, often the 2nd statement means what the first says. But it doesn't have to mean that.

In practice, sometimes the 2nd means the same as the first, probably usually. But not always. And if it were a statement of logic, rather than of ordinary language, it would NOT mean the same as the first. But, as I said, as an ordinary language statement, usually, most of the time, "I don't think X is..." means the same as "I think X is not..." (though not always).

Last edited by Mysty on 20 Jul 2008, 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I've no idea how this thread got here, since I haven't read the whole thing, but...

The double negative is enough a part of English that native speakers understand, "I didn't do nothing" as meaning the same as "I didn't do anything".

Which actually goes with what I was saying. And maybe that's how this got here? Logical language and everyday language are two different things.

I would actually argue that "I did not do nothing" is the opposite of "I didn't do nothing". The lack of contraction shows that it should not be taken as a double negative. Though, tone of voice would clarify a lot.

Those two mean the same thing basically but are worded differently. But the first one can also mean you think someone isn't an aspie but you are not sure.

That is how I interpret those sentences.

Man how interesting how people interpret sentences differently. No wonder there are misunderstandings because people miss interpret things.

Yes, most native English speakers would understand it, but few actually say it unless they're deliberately using dialect for ironic purposes (well, some relatively socio-economically marginalized groups have the double negative as a feature of their dialect).

The first statement is an external viewpoint. The speaker is referring to fact instead of opinion(but in this case it could still be untrue). Another way to look at it is "If I recall, he is not an aspie." The speaker doesnt have an emotional investment.

The second statement indicates that the speaker is in disagreement with the consensus. "He is said to be an aspie, but I dont think so." The speaker is referring to a quality of his feelings and opinions. An emotional statement.

To reiterate, I rephrased it:

I hear that he lacks aspie-ness.
I dont agree that he is an aspie.

Some people wish we could see things as concrete as you just put them, but in a world full of infinite shades of gray, I go with what make the most sense.

Why can’t everything be in black and white or at least make sense? I need finite shades of gray. Or that's what I think I want.



That’s why humans have created the idea of…ambivalence.

Ah…the weirdness of emotions and what drives people to do certain things.

Hmmm. I'm still trying to figure out if this is a trick question.

I would understand them to mean the same thing.
However, I try to never start sentences with the words...I don't think...sounds like I'm not thinking.

Two additional thoughts.

First, I think, if one is thinking about ordinary language, regular communication, asking if they are "logically equivalent" is the wrong question. It's not a matter of logic. Logic isn't the issue. It's what do people mean.

Second, I think there is enough variation in what a person saying each statement might mean, that we really can't, out of context, say they have any different meaning. Yeah, there some nuanced difference between the two. Yet, the range of what each can mean is greater than the difference between the two.

Fuzzy said that the first means "If I recall, he is not an aspie." and the second "He is said to be an aspie, but I dont think so.". I agree that the original statements could mean that. But I don't think that's the only possibility.