|
|
|
I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: 0
|
|
I did not mean to open a keg of nails with the thread before man there was no logic. What is logically (understood) by me might not be logically (understood) by you. Even if the rules of logic cannot be changed, man will still understand what he thinks is right or wrong by making up his own rules. Please be patients with my ignorance. pljames
|
|
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Plotin
Expert Boarder
Posts: 224
|
|
Re:I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: -5
|
|
Depends on the axioms, and if we understood them. No?
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
UEAPHD
Fresh Boarder
Posts: 15
|
|
Re:I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: 0
|
|
pljames wrote:
I did not mean to open a keg of nails with the thread before man there was no logic. What is logically (understood) by me might not be logically (understood) by you. Even if the rules of logic cannot be changed, man will still understand what he thinks is right or wrong by making up his own rules. Please be patients with my ignorance. pljames
What do you mean by "logically understood"? As before you're using the term "logical" in an unusual way. When we describe an argument as "logical", all we mean is that its conclusion has been inferred correctly from its premises. For example:
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
This is a logical argument as its conclusion ("Socrates is mortal") is entailed by its premises ("All men are mortal, Socrates is a man"). Thus, in order to understand that this argument is logical all one needs is a grasp of the rules which make it such. Somebody that doesn't think that it is logical simply doesn't understand the rules. Is this what you meant by "What is logically (understood) by me might not be logically (understood) by you"?
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
Plotin
Expert Boarder
Posts: 224
|
|
Re:I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: -5
|
|
UEAPHD wrote:
pljames wrote:
I did not mean to open a keg of nails with the thread before man there was no logic. What is logically (understood) by me might not be logically (understood) by you. Even if the rules of logic cannot be changed, man will still understand what he thinks is right or wrong by making up his own rules. Please be patients with my ignorance. pljames
What do you mean by "logically understood"? As before you're using the term "logical" in an unusual way. When we describe an argument as "logical", all we mean is that its conclusion has been inferred correctly from its premises. For example:
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
This is a logical argument as its conclusion ("Socrates is mortal") is entailed by its premises ("All men are mortal, Socrates is a man"). Thus, in order to understand that this argument is logical all one needs is a grasp of the rules which make it such. Somebody that doesn't think that it is logical simply doesn't understand the rules. Is this what you meant by "What is logically (understood) by me might not be logically (understood) by you"?
I wished to introduce the concept that Pigames may have meant that the subject (under deduction, and what would be a subject IF it were not real deductively?) needs to be determined LOGICAL by postulating the difference between physical and formal space and time.
In other words, there exists such a thing as Axioms for the knowledge of logical principled action and reaction. <smiley for GUILT>
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
Last Edit: 2010/07/10 05:13 By Plotin.
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
UEAPHD
Fresh Boarder
Posts: 15
|
|
Re:I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: 0
|
|
Plotin wrote:
(under deduction, and what would be a subject IF it were not real deductively?)[/quote]
What do you mean by "real deductively?" Deductive arguments are attempts to to show that a conclusion follows necessarily from its premises. Questions of reality have little to do with it.
Plotin wrote:needs to be determined LOGICAL by postulating the difference between physical and formal space and time.[/quote]
No. An argument is logical if its inferences are in accordance with the rules of logic. That's all that "logical" means.
Plotin wrote:
In other words, there exists such a thing as Axioms for the knowledge of logical principled action and reaction. <smiley for GUILT>[/quote]
This too is difficult to understand for two reasons. Firstly axioms are merely propositions which are considered to be self-evident. Are you suggesting that in order for logic to exist at all then the laws must be axiomatic? Secondly I don't understand what you mean by "logical principled action and reaction". As I've said countless times, logic just gives us the rules of inference. I don't see what "action" has to do with it.
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
|
|
Re:I stand corrected Deductive logic is logical. 1 Year, 10 Months ago
|
Karma: 4
|
|
UEAPHD wrote: An argument is logical if its inferences are in accordance with the rules of logic. That's all that "logical" means.
I presume you are limiting this definition to elementary binary deductive logic, AKA Aristotelean logic, AKA Boolean logic?
Could you not also be forced to grant that binary inductive (or binary probabilistic) logic, multi-valued (rather than binary) logic, analog logic (logic of continuous values), neural (networked) logic, and quantum logic are also logics, but for its own specialized (simplified) reasons your textbook failed to mention them?
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
Facebook.com
Twitter.com
