upvote

points

by Gormo18 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby Negitivefrags16 hours ago|
next
[-]
This is not what the “exception that proves the rule” means.

If a sign says “No parking on saturdays”, that is an exception that can be used to infer the rule “parking here is okay the rest of the time”.

reply
upvoteby nkrisc17 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
What they likely mean is that pointing to one exception that is notable only because it violates the general trend is not evidence against the trend.
reply
upvoteby vidarh18 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
The term is often also used simply as claiming the existence of a rule by claiming the exception.

It's one of those terms where I am pretty confident that I see the original use more rarely than the technically incorrect variations to the point I'd hesitate to call them incorrect any more.

reply
upvoteby vlovich12317 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> This meaning of the phrase, which for Fowler is the original and clearest meaning ... This argument states if an exception exists or has to be stated, then this exception proves that there must be some rule to which the case is an exception

So no, OP used the correct definition and no wide spread usage uses ~Q=>~P. That's a weird logical formulation that was randomly concocted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

Said another way:

Rule: It's hard to find a product that hasn't gotten worse or more expensive, even adjusted for inflation.

Exception: computers i think are more affordable now than even 20 years ago, in bang for buck

This proves the rule because if it's an exception to the rule, therefore the rule must exist in the first place.

reply
upvoteby vidarh15 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
That argument only works if someone states the exception from the start, not when someone makes the claim while using the term.
reply
upvoteby vlovich12311 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
No you’re just intentionally misunderstanding the usage to avoid admitting you’re incorrect. The usage in the thread is correct.

Poster 1: everything is worse

Poster 2: but compute has gotten better

Poster 3: that’s the exception to the rule that everything has gotten worse, proving the rule exists

reply