1. Girls = Time x Money (premise)
2. Time = Money (premise)
3. Girls = Money x Money or, Money2 (1, 2 identity substitution)
4. Money = √evil (premise)
5. Money2= evil (4, squaring both sides of an identity yields a identity)
6. Girls = evil (3, 5 transititivity of identity)
�2004 Neil Uchitel
I think my argument for God's being outside time was at least as good:
2. Time = money. (premise from above)
4. Money = √evil (premise from above)
7. God wouldn't have anything to do with evil or its roots. (premise)
8. Time = √evil (2, 4 transitivity of identity)
9. God wouldn't have anything to do with time. (7, 8 substitivity of identicals).
So God must be atemporal.
If you combine these two arguments, you get an interesting conclusion:
6. Girls = evil. (conclusion from above)
7. God wouldn't have anything to do with girls. (6, 7 substitutivity of identicals)
8. God is male.
This is the sort of thing I like to use to teach principles of formal logic, since almost every move in these arguments involves a formal fallacy.