User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 67

  1. #1
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default Do you prefer logic or evidence?

    1) Logically, the school should start the same time this monday as it started the last week
    2) The time for monday's lessons will be found in the schedule
    3) Logically, the person who invited me for a beer will provide all the beer we need
    4) I'll find out if I need to bring my own beer by asking the person who invited me
    5) Logically, the device should work when the start button is pressed
    6) I'll find out the condition of this device after pressing the start button.
    7) Logically, my spouse should be happy after coming home from whatever happy things (s)he did today.
    8) I'll hear how my spouse's day turned out after (s)he comes home.

    Do you agree more with the odd-numbered statements or even-numbered statements? This wasn't supposed to be a trick question or anything like that. I'm just saying that from my experience, I see people who claim to be "logical" as just like that. Agreeing with the odd-numbered statements and not with the even-numbered. What more is there to it?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    192

    Default

    I prefer logic, but the "logical" statements you provide aren't very logical lol. To see logic you need to show it working. Logic has REASONS why a is more probable than b. It doesn't just blurt it out like that lol.

  3. #3
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    I must admit, the "logical" statements I made are just mockingly so. But.. that's the only use of the concept I've heard lately. Personally, I've found out that logic works but I'm keeping quiet about it, considering what's the reputation of "logic" or what passes for it. I rather advertise evidence.

    Apart from appearances, I find out that evidence can only be reasonably studied in a logical system, and vice versa.

  4. #4
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,810

    Default

    I ended up trying to type 3-4 separate posts to get my thoughts across. But in the end I opted for a glib:

    Do evidence and logic often run counter to each other? Science is in for a big shock if so.... But I do somewhat sympathise with your position. There are a lot of people I know who refuse to trust the logical principals in a context until they have seen the evidence that proves it.

    On the other hand....relying too much on assumption carries it's risks as well. There are less inherent principals than we realise.

    I tend to enjoy those logic questions that are phrased something along the lines of:

    All fat men are called brian.

    You see a fat man walking towards you.

    Is he called brian?

    Logically the rule being set out as all fat men are brian means that it logically follows that all fat men would be called brian, because of the word 'all'. However we know from our 'evidential' human experience outside of purely logical principals that such a statement is of course incorrect, which is why pure logic always finds itself dumb-founded when applied to people.

    However being a feeler, perhaps I just don't get logic?
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  5. #5
    filling some space UnitOfPopulation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Posts
    3,272

    Default

    Well.. I enjoy logical statements that are set up just like that, and I find them easy to follow, too. Rules of the question state A, now assuming A and B, and clause C, give the correct answer? That's all fun to me. In my mind, logic is infallible. Yet I feel the infallible logic is rarely applicable to anything. I feel that there's a continuum of clauses that adhere more or less to strict logic and more or less to evidence, and these clauses are more or less infallible.

    Trade a little infallibility away, you get applicability. Trade a little applicability away, you get infallibility. That's how I see it.

    Edit: then there's a class of statements I see more or less as failures. These are statements that are set up like a mathematical formula, but the concepts that those statements are relying on are not well-defined in the language used to state the logical "conclusion". Yet, many people (and too many people in my mind) appreriate statements that are set up like a something logical, but are nothing like that.

    Short test: does a sentence feel more logical to you if you insert words from this list: "conclude, therefore, logically, if, and, not, then" ? Does a sentence feel more evidence-based to you if it includes words from this list: "studied, scientific, found out, know, tested" ?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    I must admit, the "logical" statements I made are just mockingly so. But.. that's the only use of the concept I've heard lately. Personally, I've found out that logic works but I'm keeping quiet about it, considering what's the reputation of "logic" or what passes for it. I rather advertise evidence.

    Apart from appearances, I find out that evidence can only be reasonably studied in a logical system, and vice versa.
    I don't even know how it mocks logic when it basically has nothing to do with it lol. Mock logic would be something like:

    All octopuses are purple
    Barry is an octopus
    Therefore, Barry is purple

    Without logically thinking about things, there would be no ideas to test. Without logic, you would not understand what your "evidence" meant - you'd just have a list of numbers/measurements.

    Anybody who goes too far either way will be irrational - you need both logic and evidence to come to right conclusions.

  7. #7
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    I like logic, but logic only works as well as the information you are logicing with.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  8. #8
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,810

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Santtu View Post
    Well.. I enjoy logical statements that are set up just like that, and I find them easy to follow, too. Rules of the question state A, now assuming A and B, and clause C, give the correct answer? That's all fun to me. In my mind, logic is infallible. Yet I feel the infallible logic is rarely applicable to anything. I feel that there's a continuum of clauses that adhere more or less to strict logic and more or less to evidence, and these clauses are more or less infallible.

    Trade a little infallibility away, you get applicability. Trade a little applicability away, you get infallibility. That's how I see it.
    That's interesting, it's also something I wonder that...well quite often I could imagine someone's logic being infallible by the rules of logic, but being wrong by other....less logical criteria.

    For example that question about being invited for a beer, of course if someone invites you for a beer it is quite logical, (HAH), to assume they would provide all the beer since they havn't set out any other parameters that would lead you to believe otherwise. But...most rules of social conduct, (Fe stuff), would point out that it is polite to enquire about whether or not you are expected to bring beer, despite the other person not implying otherwise.

    Personally I find that sort of thing annoying, such as when my mother used to ask me if I would like to hoover a room. I would reply 'no thank you I wouldn't like that' and get an indignant response. Because of course what she REALLY meant was 'hoover this room' but social conduct rules dictated that it was rude to demand this too directly. Which then makes me wonder whether she was trying to be polite, or trying to make her demand sound like a reasonable request, rather than the direct order it was.

    In both examples I don't think there was much logic either way.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    5 sx
    Posts
    506

    Default

    Logic. It goes without saying that "evidence" isn't always reliable. Examples intended to support a theory are often chosen without giving thought to ALL potential implications of the theory--what worked in situation A might not be true in situation B--and all possible interpretations of what the link between the theory and example means. Causation vs. correlation and stuff.

    Anyway I'm just skeptical of evidence because I've been scarred by the idiotic abuse of it by people with extremely weak grasps of logic.

  10. #10
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by En Gallop View Post
    I prefer logic, but the "logical" statements you provide aren't very logical lol. To see logic you need to show it working. Logic has REASONS why a is more probable than b. It doesn't just blurt it out like that lol.
    this

    I prefer logic because it gives me a method which works with any quantity and quality of evidence. But I prefer the even numbered statements because I prefer to not make assumptions.

Similar Threads

  1. Which approach do you prefer: philosophy or science?
    By Typh0n in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 161
    Last Post: 10-22-2017, 07:26 PM
  2. Do you prefer passion or stability?
    By Destiny in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-19-2015, 11:09 PM
  3. Math: Do you prefer Algebra or Geometry?
    By DreamBeliever in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 09-04-2015, 02:57 PM
  4. Do you prefer alcohol or marijuana?
    By Speed Gavroche in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-11-2012, 01:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO