What is logic?

[ygolo]

As our own Wildcat has pointed out, the semantic components of a discussion are really important.

That was made abundantly evident in this thread ... or rather a sub-topic that was weaved throughout it.

It is evident to me that we cannot even agree on what the term "logic" means, nor what constitutes a "valid," "strong" or other type of "argument."

My background of logic comes from mathematics, so I tend to use terms and concepts borrowed from mathematical logic(perhaps with some customization--it has been a while since I got my Math degree).

But "logic" is also taught in philosophy and the liberal-arts, and sometimes also taught as part of "rhetoric" in some fine-arts programs.

The conotations are often different (though not incompatible). In fact, despite the subtle differences, many of its uses are very similar.

This leads to situations where people simply argue around each other even when people are in complete agreement.

As someone who like the exercise of comming to an understanding, I am quite OK with (even fond of) this. However, IMO, the confusion often causes disharmony where it need not exist.

So lets discuss "logic."

What is it?

How is it used (im)properly? (Please provide examples)

What is related to "logic" but is seperate from it?

 

[typo]

As our own Wildcat has pointed out, the semantic components of a discussion are really important.

That was made abundantly evident in this thread ... or rather a sub-topic that was woven throughout it.

It is evident to me that we cannot even agree on what the term "logic" means, nor what constitutes a "valid," "strong" or other type of "argument."

My background of logic comes from mathematics, so I tend to use terms and concepts borrowed from mathematical logic(perhaps with some customization--it has been a while since I got my Math degree).

But "logic" is also taught in philosophy and the liberal-arts, and sometimes also taught as part of "rhetoric" in some fine-arts programs.

The conotations are often different (though not incompatible). In fact, despite the subtle differences, many of its uses are very similar.

This leads to situations where people simply argue around each other even when people are in complete agreement.

As someone who like the exercise of comming to an understanding, I am quite OK with (even fond of) this. However, IMO, the confusion often causes disharmony where it need not exist.

So lets discuss "logic."

What is it?

How is it used (im)properly? (Please provide examples)

What is related to "logic" but is seperate from it?

"Rationality" is closely related to logic but may also be separable from it. I think rational people can disagree, if that have different goals and preferences. I'm not sure there is the same room for preferences in logic. In fact, any discussion of logic seems to focus less on the reasons for something and more on some external system of rules in which reason can operate. For example, a particular language might have a complicated system of grammar that is "irrational" -- inefficient -- with respect to communication but nonetheless logical as a coherent system for conveying meanings.

 

[SillySapienne]

Logic is linguistic mathematics, in my opinion.

 

[Kiddo]

Logic is a really, really broad topic. It covers everything from studies in the way man reasons, to the actual system of reasoning that man uses.

 

[Metamorphosis]

Logic is linguistic mathematics, in my opinion.

Interesting perspective. Does this apply to thought, too, though?

I see logic as the process of filtering/sifting through information on the basis of perceived laws and facts to the exclusion of emotional bias. It is thought and action based on past experience...the individuals or chronicled.

 

[Electric]

I usually think of logic as philosophy and intuition as science.

Philosophy is all about the metaphysical. It's the thought applied to information gathered. Thus, there is manipulation of information. This is a judger's specialty.

ENTJ/INTP, ENFJ/INFP, ESTJ/ISTP, ESFJ/ISFP

Many of these types are committed to applying an ideal in life or establishing an ideal in reality.

Science is all about the physical "physics, chemistry, and ect." You have to do more memorization and recall myriads of information than you do manipulation of the information. This is a perceiver's specialty.

INTJ/ENTP, INFJ/ENFP, ISTJ/ESTP, ISFJ/ESFP

Many of these types are good at memorizing information and can notice the most complex of complex puzzles.

Then again, I'm not fully commited to this idea and putting this in a jungian view of logic.

EDIT: Isn't it interesting that philosophy is closely linked with feeling and thinking?

 

[SillySapienne]

Interesting perspective. Does this apply to thought, too, though?.

Yes.

Logic is the linguistic process of effectively processing and analyzing pertinent chunks of information, in a methodical and linear fashion, in an attempt to overcome the barriers of subjective perception in order to bridge the gap between people, and objectively communicate.


^ wow, I myself.

 

[Metamorphosis]

Yes.

Logic is the linguistic process of effectively processing and analyzing pertinent chunks of information, in a methodical and linear fashion, in an attempt to overcome the barriers of subjective perception in order to bridge the gap between people, and objectively communicate.


^ wow, I myself.

That works. But I would add that it's only goal isn't communication and bridging the gap between people. It is used in many forms, always with the end goal of finding the solution.

 

[Mikesen]

I usually think of logic as philosophy and intuition as science.

Philosophy is all about the metaphysical. It's the thought applied to information gathered. Thus, there is manipulation of information. This is a judger's specialty.

ENTJ/INTP, ENFJ/INFP, ESTJ/ISTP, ESFJ/ISFP

Many of these types are committed to applying an ideal in life or establishing an ideal in reality.

Science is all about the physical "physics, chemistry, and ect." You have to do more memorization and recall myriads of information than you do manipulation of the information. This is a perceiver's specialty.

INTJ/ENTP, INFJ/ENFP, ISTJ/ESTP, ISFJ/ESFP

Many of these types are good at memorizing information and can notice the most complex of complex puzzles.

Then again, I'm not fully commited to this idea and putting this in a jungian view of logic.

EDIT: Isn't it interesting that philosophy is closely linked with feeling and thinking?

I think it's the complete reverse. Logic deals with hard evidence. Logical laws, if you will, can develop logical proof. Intuition deals with hunches and thoughts. Logic is square, intuition is round. Science is square and tries to remove all involvement of subjectivity and the observer. It's about Objective facts. Philosophy can go from the logical developments of Descartes all the way to the mystic feelings of Lao-Tzu. Philosophy may deal with Logic, but it also heavily deals in intuition. Science on the other hand, deals exclusively with logic.


And I like what CC said too. Logic deals with deductive reasoning. We've all gone through the logical laws like "A implies B. A therefore B." Don't forget computers deal exclusively with logic. Binary? 1's and 0's. True or False.

 

[Ivy]

That is one type of logic, Mikesen: deductive logic. There is also inductive logic which is to deductive logic as civil court evidence standards are to criminal court evidence standards.

 

[Mikesen]

That is one type of logic, Mikesen: deductive logic. There is also inductive logic which is to deductive logic as civil court evidence standards are to criminal court evidence standards.

Yeah, I don't really hold Inductive logic as very evidential. I use inductive logic on an hourly basis, but I don't think it holds up to scrutiny. Polling may be useful, but it's not capital T Truth.

 

[Ivy]

It doesn't have to be "Capital T Truth" to be considered logic.

 

[Mole]

Computers and Logic

Computers run on logic but it is, "garbage in, garbage out".

Victor.

 

[ygolo]

My mind map on the discussion about logic so far

Feel free to download, modify and upload your own take on it.

 

[Kiddo]

I like your web.

However, philosophical definitions, such as the definition of logic, are arbitrary. They need to be redefined at the beginning of every philosophical discussion.

 

[ygolo]

I like your web.

However, philosophical definitions, such as the definition of logic, are arbitrary. They need to be redefined at the beginning of every philosophical discussion.

Certainly. But at least this gives us an idea of the amount and kind of diversity in the definition of logic we can find.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I like your web.

However, philosophical definitions, such as the definition of logic, are arbitrary. They need to be redefined at the beginning of every philosophical discussion.

It's much easier to be educated on the discipline and to avoid unnecessary re-definitions and re-inventing the wheel.

It's useful to be precise about what one's talking about, tho.

 

[reason]

Mostly, logic is the study of the concept of validity i.e. when does a conclusion follow from its premises, given different semantic and syntactical rules? That is why there is no such thing as "inductive logic", because an inductive argument is not a valid form of argument (besides, it is also completely uneccesary). Logic is the study of formal languages, or language-schemas.

 

[Kiddo]

It's much easier to be educated on the discipline and to avoid unnecessary re-definitions and re-inventing the wheel.

It's useful to be precise about what one's talking about, tho.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying. In any philosophical discussion, people are bound to have different conceptions and perspectives of the words and concepts in question. Therefore, good philosophers define their ideas before they begin discussing them so that everyone can follow their reasoning without getting lost in debates on semantics. Logic is such a broad and complex field which has many different meanings and types, and it is therefore a good idea for it to be redefined at the beginning of every discussion. This isn't "re-inventing" the wheel, since nobody is actually changing the definition of logic, just specifying what aspect of logic they are discussing.

 

[Athenian200]

Logic?

Well, I think logic is basically an attempt to describe just how it is that something (a system or an idea, for instance) can be exactly as it actually is, rather than describing what it is in relation to something else, or explaining what it means/could mean.

It falls short of this to some extent due to the limitations of the human mind, however.