1

# Inordinate dependance on logic

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 09:54 am
Logic can't explain anything without data.
0 Replies

cavfancier

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 09:55 am
Another flaw....
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 09:56 am
How is that a flaw? That's like saying a wordprocessor is flawed because it produces letters only when typed at.
0 Replies

cavfancier

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:12 am
Speaking of flawed typing ...let's put it this way, logic as a concept is flawed because it was developed by humans, who are flawed, and illogical. Regarding the wordprocessor example, yes, it can be logically deduced what letters will come out when a certain key is pressed, but what sort of logic are we talking about here? Mathematical, philosophical, symbolic? Also, what if the keyboard is not manufactured properly and the calculated result is not what you expect?

"What we are concerned with in logic is: What is there in a good argument that makes it good, i.e., that makes it so compelling and forceful it is not possible not to believe it."

Therefore, trying to argue both sides is illogical.
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:14 am
Humans invented teh concept of perfection as well. So perfection is flawed?
0 Replies

cavfancier

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:15 am
I don't know any perfect people, do you?
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:16 am
Known one all my life.. but we are talking about the concept. You call the 'concept' of logic flawed because humans are flawed. If that is true then the concept of perfection is also flawed.

Makes no sense.
0 Replies

cavfancier

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:33 am
The concepts of both logic and perfection are not flawed in and of themselves, but the execution of both is questionable indeed.
0 Replies

cavfancier

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:34 am
and...remember that old song...you can't have one without the other...
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 10:37 am
cavfancier wrote:
The concepts of both logic and perfection are not flawed in and of themselves, but the execution of both is questionable indeed.

I have no qualm with that. :-) For is not faulty execution illogical?
0 Replies

dlowan

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 03:52 pm
Valid logic is not flawed, in and of itself - one could argue that a human who decided to rely totally on logic to guide their lives was flawed - in terms of their human experience.
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:02 pm
That's a paradox. If it's not advisable to rely entirely on logic it is also not logical to do so. It is logical to recognize that in an emotional society you need to recognize emotions.
0 Replies

dyslexia

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:07 pm
perfection and/or logic are not unlike the north star, more of a mechanism for guidence than destination.
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:08 pm
Which is?
0 Replies

dlowan

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:29 pm
Sort of like a steering wheel, or a rudder, or the bit and reins on a horse...
0 Replies

dlowan

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:30 pm
Just kiddin' - more like a compass...ok, still kiddin'....
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 04:36 pm
I'm talking about the destination. Lots of people use journey/destination analogies and I am of the opinion that most are not well thought through.
0 Replies

LibertyD

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 05:05 pm
So is pure logic attainable? If it's illogical to rely only on logic, and it's illogical to not use any logic, then pure logic, like perfection, is only an ideal and isn't even possible.
0 Replies

Craven de Kere

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 05:09 pm
Liberty,

It's possible. To "rely only on logic" is not what most people take it to mean. It is logical to use emotions. Lots of illogical minds separate the two and act like the use of emotions is not logical.

That is simply false. At times it is illogical not to rely on emotion.
0 Replies

LibertyD

1
Mon 25 Aug, 2003 05:28 pm
Right, but there's an inherent illogic in logic -- it being logical to rely on emotion at times being a good example. In everyday relationships and decisions and encounters, it's impossible to use pure, unadulterated logic (unless you're vulcan). I think that the term defeats itself in situations that aren't scientific. So I think that not only is it illogical to have an inordinate dependance on logic, but it's impossible except in science.
0 Replies

### Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King