## User Tag List

1. 7 = ^

2. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Logic is not a system. It's not like a meat grinder or something.

What the hell... I'm not wrong.
You have suggested that it's physical. You can't misuse something that's abstract. If you are, then you're using something else. How can that be incorrect?
Well it seems we have come to an impasse. We can't very well debate what logic is if you are going to use your own personal definition.

I'll just conclude by saying that logic is a system, systems are abstract, and they are only as good as the people who use them. Even the most perfectly constructed, objective system would still be limited to the parameters of the experience of the person using it.

3. Nocapszy: why do we say that someone is using "faulty logic" when they argue badly? If the only thing that qualifies as logic is perfectly applied logic, then there would be no such thing as crappy logic. I'm going with Kiddo here- logic misapplied is still logic. It's just... shitty. And any conclusions drawn from it can't be trusted on the basis of that logic alone.

4. Originally Posted by Kiddo
Well it seems we have come to an impasse. We can't very well debate what logic is if you are going to use your own personal definition.

I'll just conclude by saying that logic is a system, systems are abstract, and they are only as good as the people who use them. Even the most perfectly constructed, objective system would still be limited to the parameters of the experience of the person using it.
How is logic a system? Because the dictionary says so?

It's not a system. But you're obviously not going to get it. It's not a tool. It's an absolute. Think of it more like a puzzle.

If you build the right pieces, then they will fit into the cutout. Logic is the cutout. It's not a system. Finding what is logical, might be systematic, but logic is not, in itself, a system.

Can you prove otherwise? I dare you.

5. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
How is logic a system? Because the dictionary says so?

It's not a system. But you're obviously not going to get it. It's not a tool. It's an absolute. Think of it more like a puzzle.

If you build the right pieces, then they will fit into the cutout. Logic is the cutout. It's not a system. Finding what is logical, might be systematic, but logic is not, in itself, a system.

Can you prove otherwise? I dare you.
Yes, we all get it, you define logic as an absolute. Of course, the logic we were talking about is the one we use in the real world, not the idea you have constructed in your mind.

6. Originally Posted by Ivy
Nocapszy: why do we say that someone is using "faulty logic" when they argue badly?
Because we're idiots. We misuse words all the time.

These are the same peolpe who say things like "very unique"

Obviously, if one thing is more unique than the other, then the first thing wasn't unique. Distinguishable, is not the same as unique.

If the only thing that qualifies as logic is perfectly applied logic, then there would be no such thing as crappy logic.
That's my point. It's a myth just like global warming.

7. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
Because we're idiots. We misuse words all the time.

These are the same peolpe who say things like "very unique"

Obviously, if one thing is more unique than the other, then the first thing wasn't unique.

That's my point. It's a myth just like global warming.
You've got to be kidding me. Why is a major subset of the study of logic devoted to the logical fallacies, if they're not actually logic at all?

8. Originally Posted by Nocapszy
How is logic a system? Because the dictionary says so?

It's not a system. But you're obviously not going to get it. It's not a tool. It's an absolute. Think of it more like a puzzle.

If you build the right pieces, then they will fit into the cutout. Logic is the cutout. It's not a system. Finding what is logical, might be systematic, but logic is not, in itself, a system.

Can you prove otherwise? I dare you.
In the end, it's all about perception. The fact that both of your definitions are different doesn't conclusively make either one wrong. It's like arguing over the name of a color.

9. Originally Posted by Metamorphosis
In the end, it's all about perception. It's like arguing over the name of a color.
QFT

A certain color can be called frank, debbie or mark, but that doesn't change the fact that it is the color that it is.

10. ENFP are idealists, not rationals. ENFP's are one of the NF types. All NF's are Idealists, therefore ENFP's are Idealists. Idealists are not Rationals, therefore ENFP's are not Rationals.

Of course, that doesn't mean they can't use logic.

#### 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