cruelty: be to animals wrong

from Quasimodo
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Related concepts

Parents crime
Weight: 0.68
, kindness
Weight: 0.57
, sin
Weight: 0.56
, problem
Weight: 0.55
Siblings starvation
Weight: 0.62
, sexual harassment
Weight: 0.36
, torture
Weight: 0.34
, arson
Weight: 0.34
, pedophilia
Weight: 0.34

Related properties

Property Similarity
be to animals wrong 1.00
be to animals bad 0.90
be to animals 0.87
is inherently wrong 0.78

Priors about this statement

Cues

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Joint Necessity Sufficiency Implication Entailment Contradiction Entropy

Evidence

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Plausible Typical Remarkable Salient

Clauses

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.05
Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
¬ Remarkable(pedophilia, is inherently wrong)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.45
Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.95
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.72
Remarkable(pedophilia, is inherently wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.37
¬ Plausible(pedophilia, is inherently wrong)

Salient implies Plausible

0.20
Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.58
¬ Salient(cruelty, be to animals wrong)

Similarity expansion

0.68
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.15
¬ Typical(cruelty, be to animals)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.46
¬ Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals bad)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.20
¬ Plausible(cruelty, be to animals)
0.66
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.86
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.34
¬ Salient(cruelty, be to animals bad)
0.65
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.30
¬ Salient(cruelty, be to animals)
0.63
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.82
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.35
¬ Plausible(cruelty, be to animals bad)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 0.87
Evidence: 0.70
Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.65
¬ Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals)
0.60
Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.90
Evidence: 0.45
Typical(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.40
¬ Typical(cruelty, be to animals bad)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.58
Salient(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals wrong)

Typical implies Plausible

0.37
Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00
Evidence: 0.47
Plausible(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.45
¬ Typical(cruelty, be to animals wrong)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.08
Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 0.78
Evidence: 0.70
¬ Remarkable(cruelty, be to animals wrong) ⋁
Evidence: 0.31
¬ Typical(pedophilia, is inherently wrong)