Conference thebay::joyoflex

>    	Are the following two sayings similar in meaning, opposite in
>    meaning, or unrelated to each other?
>    		"Absence makes the heart grow fonder."
>    		"Familarity breeds comtempt."
    
    In human meaning, they are similar, as you suggested.
    Mathematically, they are unrelated.  All four combinations of
    truth values are possible.
    
>    she simply said "The card says they're opposite, so that's the correct
>    answer."
    
    I'd like to print up a card which offers her a bridge for sale.
    Get a pair of George Bush lips and repeat your statement to her.
    Incidentally, in one of the Trivial Pursuit games, there was a
    question:  "How many months was Nancy pregnant when Ronnie married
    her?" and the answer of "3."  The U.S. distributor refused to
    include that card because they claimed that the answer was 1,
    i.e. that the card gave an incorrect answer.

    Rather than the imho slightly overcurmudgeonly stance of .1, which
    proposed that the Gentleman in question should insinuate to his Lady
    that she is as gullible as one to whom the Brooklyn Bridge might be
    sold, I would pseudohumbly offer the suggestion that perhaps the
    Gentleman might suggest to his Lady that perhaps he and she occupy
    different positions on the Piagetian scale of mental development.  (She
    lower, of course. :-)
    
    Failing that, try the Phylogenetic scale.  :-)

    	I would contend that fondness and contempt are unrelated concepts.
    For certain people I feel neither. For the family cat I feel both.
    
    	In the case of the cat it is her innate stupidity that is one of
    the factors that makes her appealing. The only birds she has ever
    caught are ones that have stunned themselves by flying into our porch
    windows, and the last time she caught one of those she brought it to
    show my daughter, gave a loud miaouw to emphasise the point, and as she
    opened her mouth to do so the bird (by now no longer stunned) flew off.
    
    	For the other part of the counter example, consider how you regard
    Leonardo da Vinci, or your local head of state (maybe).
    
    	On the other hand I respect my wife (despite 20 years of
    familiarity) and I am also rather fond of her ;-)

    Here is another pair that (seem to) have some relationship to each
    other:
    
    	1. Still rivers run deep.
    
    	2. Empty barrels make the most noise.
    
    But try as I might, I can't state the relationship.

    Re: .0
                                          
>>    Are the following two sayings similar in meaning, opposite in
>>    meaning, or unrelated to each other?
    
>>    		"Absence makes the heart grow fonder."
>>    		"Familarity breeds comtempt."


    But how about choice d.) Orthogonal to one another? The two
    clich�s express similar truisms, but they do so from opposite
    perspectives.  Ergo, orthogonal. 
 
    If I had been in your shoes, I'd have answered "similar" myself.
    The logical structure appears to be,
    		A -> B
    		~A -> ~B
    These expressions are clearly not contradictory, so I'd eliminate
    "opposite" as a possible answer.  And the expressions use the same
    operands, so they aren't unrelated.  So 'similar' is the only
    option left, and indeed similarity cannot be disproven.

    Re: .-1
    
    Let's try the same logic on:
    
    	Still rivers run deep.
    	Empty barrels make the most noise.
    
    Let X = "still rivers" = quiet people
    
    Let Y = "deep thinkers" = full barrels
    
    Then:
    
	"Still rivers run deep," becomes		X --> Y
    
    	"Empty barrels make the most noise," becomes	~Y --> ~X
    
    And that second statement can be deduced from the first, so the two are
    what?  Equivalent?

re .6

But in your examples you are equating two sets of objects which are
clearly unrelated.  If you're point is that absence is unrelated to
familiarity, and that one's heart growing fond is unrelated to contempt,
then I disagree.   The assignment of A and B in .5 look consistent to
me.

re .5

What you say is partially correct.

   A ==> B   and   ~A ==> ~B   are not opposite as you say, but you
also say they are related.  How?

Consider the equivalence   A ==> B <==> ~B ==> ~A  by definition.
Well, notice that ~B ==> ~A is the CONVERSE of ~A ==> ~B, so therefore
A ==> B is equivalent to the converse of ~A ==> ~B.  Both can be true,
or both can be false, or one can be true and the other false.  Though
the statements are refer to relationships of the same two objects, they
are logically unrelated.

Dave C.

RE: .-1 

>>   A ==> B   and   ~A ==> ~B   are not opposite as you say, but you
>>   also say they are related.  How?

The original clich�s are logically independent, as you point out, but 
they are related semantically.  They both express the same truism, 
i.e. "Compatibility is inversely related to frequency of contact."

re .8 (re .7)

A ==> B   and  ~A ==> ~B   I believe are proper renditions of the
original cliches, but they do NOT express the same truism (though both
may be true).   It would be possible to have a condition where
A ==> B, but B was ALWAYS TRUE, therefore ~A ==> ~B would NOT be true.
Here's an ugly example:

   Babies who don't dring milk eventually die.              A ==> B
   But, babies who DO drink milk also eventually die.    ~(~A ==> ~B)

Even with the original propositions, I claim they are not the same
truism.    Absence may very well make the heart grow fonder, but
it is possible that familiarity may NOT breed contempt.  The two
are independent because you cannot draw any inference about the truth
of either one from knowing the truth of the other.

Dave C.

    I believe I already answered this, before the matter of bridges.
    Mathematically they are orthogonal.  Semantically (English) they
    are related because the topics are related, and their messages
    are rather compatible, rather similar.

    It's clear to me that you guys are using the wrong side of your brain
    to understand why .0's girlfriend could not see the merit of the
    argument. 
    
    My wife would first picture in her mind's eye the fond memories of the
    romance she felt when we were separated for months. 
    
    She would then picture in her mind's eye the vulgarity of living with
    me (no comments please) day after day after day. 
    
    Of course the two are opposite! And you said "it's no big deal (I won
    the game anyway)", but again you're merely counting the score, and you
    didn't really win. 

    re .0:
    
    I think you're wrong, and that those sayings are neither similar, nor
    opposite, nor even orthoganal.
    
    "Absence makes the heart grow fonder" means that that people miss other
    people only when they're away. There is a well-known contradictory
    adage, "Out of sight, out of mind." This is why I think your answer is
    wrong. There's such a better opposite, that "Familiarity breeds
    contempt" cannot be the correct opposite.
    
    While I'm at it, though, unraveling "familiarity breeds contempt" means
    that you notice people's faults when you get up close. Personally, I
    think this is not really similar to the effect that when you're away
    from someone you tend to forget their faults. They may be related, but
    they're not similar.
    
    I don't like to give unsolicited advice so let me say that if you were
    to ask my opinion, I would say that I think it's a bad question, and
    instead of risking damaging your relationship with your girlfriend, you
    should put your game in the closet until the next time that garage sale
    comes your way, and switch to strip Scrabble, throwing her the first
    game. :-)
    
    	Jon

    G'day,
    Most proverbs have 'opposites' - sort of an each way bet!
    
    
    Look before you leap vs He who hesitates is lost
    Too many cooks... vs many hands ...
    
    Absence ... vs out of sight... seem to match
    
    so what then is the opposite of Familiarity breeds contempt?
    
    derek
    

    
    >so what then is the opposite of Familiarity breeds contempt?
    
    The very famous  Familiarity breeds content

    Or is it?
    
    Familiarity breeds attempt.

    Familiarity breeds.

Mark Twain put that way.  It's in a collection of his saying entitled

_Man is the only animal that blushes... or needs to._