Logic is absurd
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Logic is absurd
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Logic is absurd
The worst kinds of idiot are the kinds of idiot that are convinced they know something.
No! the worst kind of idiot is the one that believe that he or she is God like, All Knowing,
Know everything.
For the Know-it-all, everything that comes to mind is the Truth, a Fact, is possible.
The problem with logic as I see it, is in believing that just because something is logical that it is True, a possibility.
The primary edict of a particular ancient religion was “don’t eat beans” because when you eat beans your become gaseous, Full of Hot Air, God Like, all knowing, a Know-It-All.
-
- Posts: 91
- Joined: March 22nd, 2016, 12:59 am
Re: Logic is absurd
This is indeed the major problem with logic.Wayne92587 wrote:The problem with logic as I see it, is in believing that just because something is logical that it is True, a possibility.
The validated deductions of logic is only as true as its postulated domain, which is an assumption. Something that is logical, is not necessary true.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Logic is absurd
- Gulnara
- Posts: 496
- Joined: October 20th, 2011, 7:02 am
Re: Logic is absurd
Example:
Person gets job with 1 hour commute. He attempts to drive there every day, two hours a day instead of changing the apartment for that city. His reason is, he wants to be able to see ocasionally his friends, who lives nearby.
Logic says this: How is it worth to drive far every workday for possibly few years in order to see friends on some infrequent ocasions?
Isn't this better to get a new apartment next to the job, making commute to work very short, and drive long ditance only on occasion when there is a reason to meet up with friends?
Logic wins.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Logic is absurd
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm
Re: Logic is absurd
If something is 'possible', that is to say it may - or may not - be the case. So saying it is 'possible' is not describing the thing, it is describing our state of knowledge about it. 'It is possible that there is life on Mars' means 'I do not know if there is life on Mars or not'.BelieveNothing wrote: Can anyone refute this?:
It's possible for all things to be possible and it's impossible for all things to be impossible
so
It's not possible for all things to be impossible and it's not impossible for all things to be possible.
Where are the boundaries beyond which things are impossible? And how can those boundaries be pushed or moved so that impossible things become possible?
Consider; if we know the facts, if we know something is the case, then it is not 'possible', it simply is. And if we know something is not the case, then it is not 'possible' either, it simply is-not. i.e. If there is not 'life on Mars' then it is not possible that there is 'life on Mars'. If there is 'life on Mars' then it isn't possible there isn't 'life on Mars'.
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm
Re: Logic is absurd
If everything is a sequence of actualities, then it is reasonable to think that only those things were possible. If those things which happened were truly inevitable, then the word possible doesn't seem appropriate to describe them. The language of possibility is the language of agency. The language of causality doesn't admit room for agency or thus possibility.BelieveNothing wrote:Anything and everything is possible,
Anyhow it's good to remember:
"Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory, and everything which is not compulsory is forbidden."
- Consul
- Posts: 6136
- Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
- Location: Germany
Re: Logic is absurd
What you describe here is the concept of epistemic possibility, but there are also non-knowledge-relative concepts of metaphysical/ontological and nomological possibility. See: Varieties of Modality!Londoner wrote:If something is 'possible', that is to say it may - or may not - be the case. So saying it is 'possible' is not describing the thing, it is describing our state of knowledge about it. 'It is possible that there is life on Mars' means 'I do not know if there is life on Mars or not'.
Consider; if we know the facts, if we know something is the case, then it is not 'possible', it simply is. And if we know something is not the case, then it is not 'possible' either, it simply is-not. i.e. If there is not 'life on Mars' then it is not possible that there is 'life on Mars'. If there is 'life on Mars' then it isn't possible there isn't 'life on Mars'.
By the way, if (we know that) p, then it is possible that p—since actuality implies possibility (but nonactuality doesn't imply impossibility!).
"We say that a proposition p is epistemically possible relative to what is known in an epistemic situation S just in case p is consistent with what is known in (or 'possible in view of what is known in') S."
(Dietz, Richard. "Epistemic Modals and Correct Disagreement." In Relative Truth, edited by Manuel Garcia-Carpintero and Max Kölbel, 239-264. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. p. 240)
- Kathyd
- Posts: 59
- Joined: June 21st, 2017, 3:43 pm
Re: Logic is absurd
So you do not believe in free will?Chili wrote:If everything is a sequence of actualities, then it is reasonable to think that only those things were possible. If those things which happened were truly inevitable, then the word possible doesn't seem appropriate to describe them. The language of possibility is the language of agency. The language of causality doesn't admit room for agency or thus possibility.
Anyhow it's good to remember:
"Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory, and everything which is not compulsory is forbidden."
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm
Re: Logic is absurd
Mystics and physicists alike will say the individual self is an illusion, that all is one, and that individual choice is a gesture of the cosmos.Kathyd wrote:So you do not believe in free will?Chili wrote:If everything is a sequence of actualities, then it is reasonable to think that only those things were possible. If those things which happened were truly inevitable, then the word possible doesn't seem appropriate to describe them. The language of possibility is the language of agency. The language of causality doesn't admit room for agency or thus possibility.
Anyhow it's good to remember:
"Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory, and everything which is not compulsory is forbidden."
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm
Re: Logic is absurd
Possibly! But then the paradox I was answering refers several times to to 'things'. Of course, if 'possible' was meant in some other way BelieveNothing ought to make that clear - but if they did, I do not think we would see any paradox.Consul wrote:What you describe here is the concept of epistemic possibility, but there are also non-knowledge-relative concepts of metaphysical/ontological and nomological possibility. See: Varieties of Modality!Londoner wrote:If something is 'possible', that is to say it may - or may not - be the case. So saying it is 'possible' is not describing the thing, it is describing our state of knowledge about it. 'It is possible that there is life on Mars' means 'I do not know if there is life on Mars or not'.
Consider; if we know the facts, if we know something is the case, then it is not 'possible', it simply is. And if we know something is not the case, then it is not 'possible' either, it simply is-not. i.e. If there is not 'life on Mars' then it is not possible that there is 'life on Mars'. If there is 'life on Mars' then it isn't possible there isn't 'life on Mars'.
I would disagree, again because the paradox does not refer to a term in logic, like 'p', but an object; a 'thing'. I do not think the word 'possibility' works that way if we are talking about objects, rather than propositions. To say something in the physical world is 'possible' could be to assert a fact about the physical world. The proposition 'the moon is made of cheese' must be capable of being negated to be a proposition in logic, but to say 'it is possible the moon is made of cheese' is simply false.By the way, if (we know that) p, then it is possible that p—since actuality implies possibility (but nonactuality doesn't imply impossibility!).
Or alternatively, as I suggest, it might be an assertion about the speaker; 'I have no idea what the moon is made of'. In which case, you are not asserting anything about the moon. Then there is nothing in BelieveNothing's paradox to refute, because he has not asserted anything.
- Philo Sofee
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 3
- Joined: February 24th, 2018, 10:29 am
Re: Logic is absurd
I think I agree here. Logic is not absurd, it is incomplete. The use and misuse of logic can be absurd and/or incomplete however.Joustos wrote: ↑June 10th, 2017, 11:25 pm "Anything and everything is possible,..." you wrote. You refute yourself, because, if anything is possible, then your statement is possibly false -- that is, it is not necessarily so. (The logic of modalities is the calculus of Possible, Impossible, Necessary, Non-necessary.) Add "actuality" at the center of the old "Square of Oppositions".
If Logic is absurd (a contradiction in terms), then it cannot exist and, therefore does not exist. But it does exist. Therefore, by the Modus Tollens of the Conditional Syllogism, it is false that logic is absurd.
-
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: February 7th, 2018, 9:11 am
Re: Logic is absurd
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023