Reply
Sun 1 Jan, 2012 04:44 pm
I've never argued that a skeptic can doubt their logic but that was before I revised my definition of logic. I thought logic meant reasoning and using evidence to prove something. I never knew that logic could mean something that was self evident. Couldn't it be that self-evidence doesn't require logic? Can something that is earnestly believed possibly be wrong? Something earnestly believed by most is an awareness/consiousness. I could say thoughts but since nothing can be known about the nature of thoughts I will just describe thinking as an awareness. In an argument a radical skeptic will say that something earnestly believed can be wrong but is there an example of this?
@curiousjo,
At one point the civilized world thought the earth was flat and that ships would sail off the edge. That thought was honestly believed. It proved to be quite wrong.
Likewise the belief was held that the earth was the center of the universe (or was that the solar system?). Likewise it was a widely and an honestly held belief.
If tenets are not based on logic and something that is scientifically provable or proven, it can be wrong and illogical.
@curiousjo,
The human mind is not all that dependable when it comes to logic. That's the reason why there are so many different religions and political parties with every level of so-called intelligent and the educated people with differing beliefs and opinions.
In the human world, skepticism is healthy.
@curiousjo,
I'm not a "professional" skeptic and I don't speak for all, but generally skeptics tend to doubt everything, including thier own logic. They would encourage others to doubt thiers also.
What is anathema to a skeptic is certainty, belief and faith.
There's almost nothing that can be objectively proven, so even the greatest skeptic assumes many things in their daily lives so that they can even... well, live. Pure logic cant go nowhere, it needs to have somewhere to go off from, and this "somewhere" is usually something that is simply assumed to be true.
For example, we have no proof of that objects cannot materialize from nowhere (proving that would require observing an area of space for infinite time, what cant be done). We assume that is true from the fact that it never happens... but quantum mechanics now suggests that it does happen, only that the frequency is small enough to make it seen like it never does... and if the frequency is that small, there's no problem in happly continuing to hold that as true for practical purposes.
@manored,
I guess for people like you, your life doesn't exist.
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
I guess for people like you, your life doesn't exist.
Actually, my life is one of the few things that can be proven without making assumptions. I couldnt question my existance if I didnt exist =)
The classic "I think, therefore I am".
@manored,
You just answered your own question with
Quote:Pure logic cant go nowhere, it needs to have somewhere to go off from, and this "somewhere" is usually something that is simply assumed to be true.
@cicerone imposter,
But I didnt make a question.
@manored,
You said
Quote:Actually, my life is one of the few things that can be proven without making assumptions. I couldnt question my existance if I didnt exist =)
You also wrote
Quote:Pure logic cant go nowhere, it needs to have somewhere to go off from, and this "somewhere" is usually something that is simply assumed to be true.
So, are you an assumption? LOL
@cicerone imposter,
I said "usually", for precisely this reason =)
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace