This is a though question a friend of mine asked me. I managed to explain it related to rationality "Because we are rational beings."

I know logic is everywhere ( especially simple binary logic ) in the laws of physics, natural selection, chemistry. Can someone help me to define logic without connecting it to another ambiguous concept. I would like a more precise answer.

If logic is incorrect ( don't see how that is possible ) then all else is also.

My recent logic stream that I like to use:

logic = Reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity validity = The quality of supporting the intended point or claim;

claim = An assertion of the truth of something, typically one that is disputed or in doubt

true = That which is true or in accordance with fact or reality

fact = A piece of information used as evidence

evidence = your basis for belief or disbelief; knowledge on which to base belief;
evidence != ( not equal to ) childish and primitive stories


Tags: argument, atheist, claim, correct, evidence, fact, false, logic, origin, question, More…stumbled, theist, true

Views: 1299

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Wonderful explanation Radule. I understood everything you have said. I always have thought that everything has a certain uncertainty ( paradox? )

I love the ramification into deductive and inductive. I have never thought about it that way. It reorganized my mind.

If we know all the factors in the system, using deductive logic, we can form a resulting, more complex conclusion which is based on the validity of the initial factors ( true or false )

Inductive is the same thing, different only because of our measuring instruments errors. If a certain instrument could provide a 100% result then that would be 0 uncertainties, thus a true statement. Our instruments, as they advance, can only narrow down the uncertainties.

All our "real" reasoning is based on uncertainties an probabilities.

It all depends on where we are located. If we are inside a system ( reality ) we can only use inductive reasoning. If we create a system that is within us ( our mind ) deductive reasoning provides the resulting answer. The key thing is that all the data within that system is also based on the bigger one ( reality - our mind imagines only what it is capable of - 8 dimensional cubes would be hard )

It is important now that science can narrow down the doubt and that it can infuse our mind with more precise data to chew on.

In the end, inductive and deductive are basically the same. Inductive gets data from reality using some instruments with a given uncertainty. Deductive uses that data to create abstractions.

Thanks Radu and Adriana ( first in line gets the credit ;) ). This was insightful.

By the way. I think what my friend was trying to prove is the uncertainties of logic that make logic "wrong". I just deduced that it's not the logic that's wrong. It's the data from our imperfect instruments.
Uncertainties can be in mathematics too.

solve a + b = 9

a and b has an infinity of solutions in pairs and, i maybe wrong, you can't be certain to what a or b is.
So we are certain about the uncertainties of a certain equation. Nice.

Mind = blown
What makes sense on a fundamental instinctive level of understanding.


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service