|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Mar 21, 2023 14:15:47 GMT
Imagine a dialogue:
A: (said something)
B: You were illogical
A: Show me a form of a logical talk or give me an example of it
B: (demonstrated, and gave some examples)
A: But how could I be certain about the forms, or how could I be sure that my talk would be logical?
Whatever B would answer A still had chances to keep doubting any forms of logic presented by B, because any answers of B would be synthetical.
Briefly, for anyone to know what logic is or what does it mean to be logical there must be given examples, and each time any new examples would be only forms.
|
|
Neuron420
Junior Member
Posts: 77
Likes: 37
Ethnicity: Texan
Country: USA
Region: Southern United States
Location: San Antonio
Ancestry: Scots/Irish, Northern Europe, French, Northern Italian
Taxonomy: Southerner
Politics: Progressive
Religion: NONE
Relationship Status: Married
Hero: Isaac Asimov & Albert Einstein
Philosophy: Skeptical Humanist
|
Post by Neuron420 on Apr 30, 2023 19:10:01 GMT
It has been my experience that generally when people say they are "being logical" it has nothing to do with logic in the academic sense. They are referring to what they consider to be either "common sense" or they are using either, inductive or deductive reasoning, sometimes both, concerning their view of the subject being discussed. Cheers!
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Apr 30, 2023 20:12:29 GMT
It has been my experience that generally when people say they are "being logical" it has nothing to do with logic in the academic sense. They are referring to what they consider to be either "common sense" or they are using either, inductive or deductive reasoning, sometimes both, concerning their view of the subject being discussed. Cheers! Do agree with you. Perhaps, twice, maybe more, there were situations people accusing me being illogical. Must be that sometimes I might be. Especially it's uneasy to decide when a situation is complicated enough to carefully divide it into the blocks of simplier problems to get step by a step from the easier to the more complex, just like Descartes wrote hundreds of years ago. However, sometimes people don't even explain their accusations. Exactly this riddle - about the form of logic, or no analiticity - was discovered firstly (at least it can be found among the papers of the author) by Lewis Carroll, the famous author of that Alice. I don't remember the exact name of that article, but there was a dialogue between a turtle, and another creature. So, my dialogue is more or less similar to that. However, must say I found it not being familiar with Carroll's; some guys from Quora.com told me that. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 3, 2023 19:55:11 GMT
Imagine a dialogue: A: (said something) B: You were illogical A: Show me a form of a logical talk or give me an example of it B: (demonstrated, and gave some examples) A: But how could I be certain about the forms, or how could I be sure that my talk would be logical? Whatever B would answer A still had chances to keep doubting any forms of logic presented by B, because any answers of B would be synthetical. Briefly, for anyone to know what logic is or what does it mean to be logical there must be given examples, and each time any new examples would be only forms. If we analyze logic, and logic is analysis, then we are analyzing analysis and logic becomes self-refuting. |
|
rexa
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Likes: 16
|
Post by rexa on May 3, 2023 20:09:16 GMT
There are facts that can't be argued and are objective. Other person negating is simply holding on to it's ego..e.g if I say you look like a saddistic evil being. Its not logical and subjective. U are a Ukrainian that's objective
|
|
rexa
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Likes: 16
|
Post by rexa on May 3, 2023 20:10:04 GMT
Imagine a dialogue: A: (said something) B: You were illogical A: Show me a form of a logical talk or give me an example of it B: (demonstrated, and gave some examples) A: But how could I be certain about the forms, or how could I be sure that my talk would be logical? Whatever B would answer A still had chances to keep doubting any forms of logic presented by B, because any answers of B would be synthetical. Briefly, for anyone to know what logic is or what does it mean to be logical there must be given examples, and each time any new examples would be only forms. If we analyze logic, and logic is analysis, then we are analyzing analysis and logic becomes self-refuting. Get off the drugs |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 3, 2023 20:15:54 GMT
If we analyze logic, and logic is analysis, then we are analyzing analysis and logic becomes self-refuting. Get off the drugs Learn to think: if we break down analysis then there is no analysis left as analysis is broken down. It is like dissecting an organism but having to kill or harm the organism first before it is dissected. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 3, 2023 20:17:13 GMT
There are facts that can't be argued and are objective. Other person negating is simply holding on to it's ego..e.g if I say you look like a saddistic evil being. Its not logical and subjective. U are a Ukrainian that's objective What does it mean to be a Ukrainian considering the boundaries of countries are in a state of flux? Name something that cannot be argued otherwise. |
|
rexa
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Likes: 16
|
Post by rexa on May 3, 2023 20:20:42 GMT
There are facts that can't be argued and are objective. Other person negating is simply holding on to it's ego..e.g if I say you look like a saddistic evil being. Its not logical and subjective. U are a Ukrainian that's objective What does it mean to be a Ukrainian considering the boundaries of countries are in a state of flux? Name something that cannot be argued otherwise. Lizard is a reptile |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 3, 2023 20:26:55 GMT
What does it mean to be a Ukrainian considering the boundaries of countries are in a state of flux? Name something that cannot be argued otherwise. Lizard is a reptile A reptile is a concept that denotes x,y,z characteristics. As a concept the reptile is invented and as invented can be subject to change, i.e. a reptile may mean a,b,c instead of x,y,z. Throughout the course of human history the concept of reptile has not always been around. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 4, 2023 14:25:02 GMT
Imagine a dialogue: A: (said something) B: You were illogical A: Show me a form of a logical talk or give me an example of it B: (demonstrated, and gave some examples) A: But how could I be certain about the forms, or how could I be sure that my talk would be logical? Whatever B would answer A still had chances to keep doubting any forms of logic presented by B, because any answers of B would be synthetical. Briefly, for anyone to know what logic is or what does it mean to be logical there must be given examples, and each time any new examples would be only forms. If we analyze logic, and logic is analysis, then we are analyzing analysis and logic becomes self-refuting. You said in two words what Carroll Lewis said in his article - this paradox (or something?) is reference to his work. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 4, 2023 14:35:56 GMT
There are facts that can't be argued and are objective. Other person negating is simply holding on to it's ego..e.g if I say you look like a saddistic evil being. Its not logical and subjective. U are a Ukrainian that's objective There are different types of facts. Natural facts are something to be different depending on interpretations. The Ptolemean system seemed correct until the Copernicus discovery. Necessity facts are such that x=x, or kinda. Since all what a necessary fact can rely on are only necessary facts sometimes it occurs for them to result in paradoxes. The one you see above is a type of Lewis Carroll's one, the one who wrote "Alice in Wonderland". |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 4, 2023 19:54:49 GMT
Logic can be analytical, or it can be synthetic.
When you compose music in an app, its most synthetic.
The guy who wrote the app, was mostly using analysis to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 4, 2023 19:58:33 GMT
Bebe thinks the DRUGS are scary.
Do they make you feel things you did not want to?
Or do they make you think things you did not like?
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 4, 2023 20:01:37 GMT
Logic can be analytical, or it can be synthetic. When you compose music in an app, its most synthetic. The guy who wrote the app, was mostly using analysis to do so. Yes! Exactly! |
|
