User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 46

  1. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    I don't think "logic" is being defined correctly.

    Logic based on false assumptions is still logical. Logic is just a tool.

    Now, can logic result in irrational conclusions? Yes, indeed...
    Yes that's formal logic, perhaps the most important definition.

    It's been a bit corrupted since then. Which is a shame because it has simple answers for most questions, including this one.

    If the conclusion follows the premises, it is logical, if not, it is illogical. So the truth value of the premises does not affect the logic. So, a logical conclusion can be a false one. Of course, if the premises are false, it doesn't mean the conclusion is false, just that there's no logic there. In fact, both the premises and the conclusion can be true, but there be no logic there, because the conclusion doesn't follow the premises.

    So, in this sense, it's "illogical" to assume a logical conclusion is a true conclusion or that an illogical conclusion is a false one.

    The corruption of logic's meaning is also awesome, because the English language is nice like that. There's good reason to think this aspect is one of the things which help with abstract thought, along with how fluid the syntax is. It's probably nice for poetry and things too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chunes View Post
    Logic requires assumptions and careful boundaries to work properly.

    If someone uses logic to arrive at a conclusion about say, Israel's motives behind its latest military bravado, then I can only assume his premise takes into account every factor in the universe, since every factor in the universe would be required to make an accurate observation.

    Logical streams of cause and effect assume that only one thing causes the next thing to happen. Existence isn't like that.
    That's where inductive reasoning steps in. That is, reasoning that does not arrive at a definite conclusion. Even certain "logical" fallacies sometimes become logical when using inductive reasoning (ad hominem, ad populem, appeal to authority etc.)

    Bare in mind that probability, what inductive reasoning deals with, is merely a measure of the referee's knowledge.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chunes View Post
    Nor have I seen an example of logic used to prove anything outside a closed axiomatic system.
    I assume you mean this but, that is because that's the only realm logic can prove (certainty) anything within.

    Again, all that is with formal logic, there are many colloquial definitions of logic outside of this scope.

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    This

    Any logical construct rests on the foundation of its premises. If these are not sound, the whole structure collapses or is unstable.


    The easiest way to spot illogical logic is when it circles back around instead of proving or disproving either true or false. Basically for your last statement to be what you want it to be(true or false) you must change the begining which changes the whole reasoning altogether. The thing is that you can logically follow that path over and over and come to the same results. The only way to fix it is to modify the logic.
    Im out, its been fun

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    473

    Default

    False assumptions such as... human emotion? Some might say "I am logical because I'm unaffected by emotions". These people are idiots, I know because I used to be one. Logic is a framework of cause and effect that we can recognize, but as soon as someone tries to be logical they are arent factoring in their inability to do so.

    There is truth, and then there is everything else. Whether you know it or believe it doesn't make it go away. Why bother with so-called logic when there is something far greater?

  4. #34
    Senior Member captain curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    BIRD
    Enneagram
    631 sp
    Posts
    3,278

    Default

    when it contradicts common sense and facts.

  5. #35
    Yeah, I can fly. Aleksei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILE Ti
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Common sense could be wrong. Recorded facts could be based on faulty assumptions.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Teacher (Idyllic), ESE-IEI (Si-ESFj), SLue|I|, Sanguine-Melancholy
    Sage, True Neutral (Chaotic Good), Type III Anti-Hero
    Inventive > Artistic > Leisurely > Dramatic
    7w6 > 4w3 > 9w8, weakside sp/so

    Dark Worker (Sacrificing)
    Freewheeling Designer

    Hayekian Asshole


  6. #36
    Senior Member captain curmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    BIRD
    Enneagram
    631 sp
    Posts
    3,278

    Default

    touche. i actually feel stupid seeing what i wrote now...but continuing on,

    if that is known, and there are no reliable frameworks, references, or experiences, then "logic" cannot be applied.

  7. #37
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,881

    Default

    Logic is never illogical. Logic can lead to illogical x, but you cannot say "Logic = Illogical" ever. Just like you can't say "1 = 2" .. It always has to be "1 + 1 = 2" that +1 being whatever.

    Anyways, the closest answer I saw to even remotely convincing me was the post on the math theories.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Logic is never illogical. Logic can lead to illogical x, but you cannot say "Logic = Illogical" ever. Just like you can't say "1 = 2" .. It always has to be "1 + 1 = 2" that +1 being whatever.

    Anyways, the closest answer I saw to even remotely convincing me was the post on the math theories.
    Logic is the study of reasoning. Logical will never be illogical. Illogical logic is when you are not really studying reasoning, but when you apply logic and put it up to be scrutinized. At that point it is either illogical or logical.
    Im out, its been fun

  9. #39
    Senior Member LEGERdeMAIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,545

    Default

    Seriously.....you are much better at being irrational than being logical. You are also good at acting logical, unfortunately you cannot escape your own master plan.
    “Some people will tell you that slow is good – but I’m here to tell you that fast is better. I’ve always believed this, in spite of the trouble it’s caused me. Being shot out of a cannon will always be better than being squeezed out of a tube. That is why God made fast motorcycles, Bubba…”


  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    10,501

    Default

    Logic: The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.

    Logical: Reasoning or capable of reasoning in a clear and consistent manner.

    Illogical: Contradicting or disregarding the principles of logic.

    Deductive Reasoning
    The most common method of building an argument is deductive reasoning, where a syllogism is constructed using a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion. In most cases, the major premise is the all-encompassing, worldview idea, while the minor premise is the idea specific to a given argument. The conclusion then naturally follows from the two premises.

    For example, in an essay arguing that handguns should be outlawed, the syllogism might look like this:

    Major Premise: That which is potentially dangerous should be outlawed.
    Minor Premise: Handguns are potentially dangerous.
    Conclusion: Handguns should be outlawed.
    When evaluating the merits of a deductive syllogism, the critical thinker needs to ask if an argument is sound. That is, are the premises true (do you agree?) and are the premises valid (do they relate to each other?). If the syllogism is either false or invalid, then the argument is unsound.
    And no I have nothing against handguns as I did not write the above quote.
    Im out, its been fun

Similar Threads

  1. Personology... When is your birthday?
    By persianeyes in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: 05-23-2010, 03:50 AM
  2. What is logic?
    By ygolo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 05-31-2009, 05:27 PM
  3. When is it going too far?
    By GinKuusouka in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-21-2009, 06:26 AM
  4. When is Feeling positive/negative?
    By Athenian200 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-24-2007, 03:48 PM
  5. When is it type?
    By proteanmix in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 01:55 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