Logic is absurd

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Burning ghost
Posts: 2802
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Burning ghost » June 22nd, 2017, 4:44 am

Over application and extension of mathematical logic into language is not an absurdity it is a stupidity (see OP)

:P
AKA badgerjelly

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Wayne92587 » July 16th, 2017, 12:53 pm

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.

Paradigmer
Posts: 51
Joined: March 22nd, 2016, 12:59 am

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Paradigmer » July 16th, 2017, 10:01 pm

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.
This is indeed the major problem with logic.

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.

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Wayne92587 » July 17th, 2017, 12:46 pm

Anything is possible is not true.

User avatar
Gulnara
Posts: 493
Joined: October 20th, 2011, 7:02 am

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Gulnara » November 3rd, 2017, 9:04 pm

Logic is not 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.

Wayne92587
Posts: 1756
Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Wayne92587 » November 7th, 2017, 1:20 pm

Your Logic wins example is a Loser

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Londoner » November 7th, 2017, 2:16 pm

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?
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'.

Chili
Posts: 359
Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Chili » November 7th, 2017, 4:05 pm

BelieveNothing wrote:Anything and everything is possible,
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."

User avatar
Consul
Posts: 1305
Joined: February 21st, 2014, 6:32 am
Location: Germany

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Consul » November 7th, 2017, 4:43 pm

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'.
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!

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)
"We may philosophize well or ill, but we must philosophize." – Wilfrid Sellars

User avatar
Kathyd
Posts: 52
Joined: June 21st, 2017, 3:43 pm

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Kathyd » November 7th, 2017, 4:59 pm

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."
So you do not believe in free will?

Chili
Posts: 359
Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Chili » November 7th, 2017, 10:54 pm

Kathyd wrote:
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."
So you do not believe in free will?
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.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Londoner » November 8th, 2017, 4:47 am

Consul wrote:
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'.
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!
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.
By the way, if (we know that) p, then it is possible that p—since actuality implies possibility (but nonactuality doesn't imply impossibility!).
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.

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.

User avatar
Philo Sofee
New Trial Member
Posts: 3
Joined: February 24th, 2018, 10:29 am

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by Philo Sofee » February 24th, 2018, 9:50 pm

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.
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.

milvalos
New Trial Member
Posts: 6
Joined: February 7th, 2018, 9:11 am

Re: Logic is absurd

Post by milvalos » February 25th, 2018, 3:32 am

We have not one logic generally shared because inescapable while we should strive to have one. In general logic is the assessment of the need to put in line thoughts in order to make them able to reflect becoming and our multifarious expectations. Futhermore, there's the possibility of using our logic ability to put to radical use our abstractive ability in order to fathom where philosophies and theoretical physics cannot reach. [mlv25fe18 08a32]

Post Reply