Role of Logic

[Speakpigeon]

Hi, people of the Earth,

How are you today? I'm fine, thank you. I'm going to try to sort out what it is you think the role of logic is in your everyday life on the planet Earth (please state if you currently live on a different planet).

So, this is a poll, and here is the question:

How big a role do you think does DEDUCTIVE LOGIC play in the way you reason?

Possible answers:

A - None whatsoever.
B - It's very important. It's always there somehow. It has always a role, whatever my reasoning may be. I couldn't reason in any way without it.
C - It's fundamental. It's constitutive of the way humans happen to reason.
D - I don't know what you're talking about.
E - Inductive logic is more important to the way human begins reason!
F - A very minor role. Sure I could use it but I don't need it for most of my everyday activities.
G - I only use it when it becomes crucial somehow.
H - It doesn't even exist at all. As a matter of that, human beings can't actually 'reason'. Only my brain does anything at all and brains don't do 'reasoning'.
I - It's too many answers. I can't possibly read them all.
J - I'm the only one I know who happens to reason properly. Other people somehow always get their premises wrong. No logic at all! Pathetic!
K - Fortunately, I can choose when to use it and it's not very often because it's not very effective given that it's also too complicated.
L - I haven't studied it so I wouldn't know how to use it properly. My judgement is good enough to think straight anyway.
M - It's a completely illogical question.
N - It's a completely illogical answer.
O - It's a delusion people have. It's an imaginary construct that doesn't exist. It's a philosophical conceit. It's metaphysical goo spread all over the place.
P - Now that you mention it I don't actually remember using it, ever.
Q - You need to have a reality check here! It's been proven wrong time and time again so I wouldn't advise anyone to use it if they can help it.
R - I'm working very hard to make money and I don't have any time to spend on wasteful moronic games! Get a life!
S - Actually, I would use it if I knew what it's for.
T - Hey! I'm not a logician, Ok?
U - How would I know?
V - I refuse to answer silly questions.
W - Same as Jesus.
X - All answers above.
Y - It's illogical to use logic.
Z - Hey, my answer isn't in there! There's not enough letters!


EB

 

[Juma]

define "deductive logic".

 

[Speakpigeon]

define "deductive logic".

So that's a straightforward "D", i.e. "I don't know what you're talking about".

That's a good one, congratulation.

Still, you can tick several answers that you would like too.

EB

 

[rousseau]

Well, I'm a programmer so sound deductive ability is pretty critical to my material well being.

Outside of programming, I'd say inductive logic plays more of a role.

 

[Juma]

define "deductive logic".

So that's a straightforward "D", i.e. "I don't know what you're talking about".

That's a good one, congratulation.

Still, you can tick several answers that you would like too.

EB

so what is the purpouse of this? psychological research?

 

[Speakpigeon]

So that's a straightforward "D", i.e. "I don't know what you're talking about".

That's a good one, congratulation.

Still, you can tick several answers that you would like too.

EB

so what is the purpouse of this? psychological research?

What makes you think that in your case I would need more research?


Now, I can't possibly interfere with your answers to the poll, that would be highly unscientific.

Maybe you feel that "I don't know what you're talking about" doesn't fit your situation that you need somebody to define deduction. But why? I think it does.
EB

 

[Speakpigeon]

Well, I'm a programmer so sound deductive ability is pretty critical to my material well being.

Do you mean that you have to use deductive logic to be able to analyse the situations in which the computers you program operate and to decide how to specify through your programs how they should behave in each situation?

Or do you mean that understanding deductive logic helps you understand either how computers work or how they will respond to your programs?

Outside of programming, I'd say inductive logic plays more of a role.

Could you give an example where using inductive logic but not deductive logic would be useful?
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Since I'm the only one whose voted and I voted inductive is more important I'm going to say that I search for things and alternatives all the time. When I come upon an alternative I combine it with the observation and generate deduced options. Then I go back to my finding data mode looking in those and implied directions for more with which to find interesting stuff.

I do both, but having having information with which I can form alternatives from which to form new questions and rationales. I find the looking for information most important, then looking for new information in a frame subsequently important to my finding information objectives.

 

[fromderinside]

so what is the purpouse of this? psychological research?

What makes you think that in your case I would need more research?


Now, I can't possibly interfere with your answers to the poll, that would be highly unscientific.

Maybe you feel that "I don't know what you're talking about" doesn't fit your situation that you need somebody to define deduction. But why? I think it does.
EB

Hi WOMPR. Do you want to play a game?

 

[rousseau]

Do you mean that you have to use deductive logic to be able to analyse the situations in which the computers you program operate and to decide how to specify through your programs how they should behave in each situation?

Or do you mean that understanding deductive logic helps you understand either how computers work or how they will respond to your programs?

Outside of programming, I'd say inductive logic plays more of a role.

Could you give an example where using inductive logic but not deductive logic would be useful?
EB

When I write computer programs the intention is to have them work perfectly. With a given input, I should get a given output. To go from an input and reach the output, I have to be certain of my logic. IF this THEN that WHILE this etc, at it's core a computer program is just a complicated set of if statements and data manipulation between two states, so when I write statements I have to know what they do beyond any doubt.

Inductive logic is how one would make decisions between two threads of behavior. 'If I don't stand up at my desk every hour I might get blood clots and die by the time I'm 50'.. therefore I should probably do that. 'If the odds of winning the lottery are very low I should probably not play the lottery and just save my money'. Obviously one could get more intricate examples, but that's the gist.

 

[Speakpigeon]

When I write computer programs the intention is to have them work perfectly. With a given input, I should get a given output. To go from an input and reach the output, I have to be certain of my logic. IF this THEN that WHILE this etc, at it's core a computer program is just a complicated set of if statements and data manipulation between two states, so when I write statements I have to know what they do beyond any doubt.

I take it that IF and WHILE statements have to assess the one logical formula that you put there. I believe that most such formula are pretty straightforward, i.e. a mix of conjunctions, disjunctions and negations. The less, the better. So, as I understand it, deductive logic comes in as you decide exactly which formula to put in any IF or WHILE statement. I'll use a railway example. Suppose you need to have a statement that will stop or let go trains somewhere on the line on the basis of a set of conditions. You know what kind of conditions there could be and when exactly the system should stop or let go a train given particular conditions. Deduction comes in to help you decide what the computer-based system will do given each possible set of conditions and therefore which formula to put there. It is essentially because you know how computers standardly assess conditions that you can deduce what they'll do in any given case. So you use deduction to predict what computers do. So, in effect, it's not that you need to be certain of your logic. In reality, you need to be certain of the logic of the computer. Correct?

Inductive logic is how one would make decisions between two threads of behavior. 'If I don't stand up at my desk every hour I might get blood clots and die by the time I'm 50'.. therefore I should probably do that.

Sorry but that's straightforwardly deductive logic.

'If the odds of winning the lottery are very low I should probably not play the lottery and just save my money'. Obviously one could get more intricate examples, but that's the gist.

That, too, is deductive logic.

Any other example?
EB

 

[Rayschism]

There's way too many choices in that poll.

I use it only when necessary.

 

[Speakpigeon]

There's way too many choices in that poll.

Yeah, there's a reason.

I use it only when necessary.

Are you able to say when you think it's not necessary?

Could you give a few examples of that?
EB

 

[Rayschism]

Yeah, there's a reason.

I use it only when necessary.

Are you able to say when you think it's not necessary?

Could you give a few examples of that?
EB

I'm not sure I can.

In politics, I try to use it because, like it or not, politics does often have personal consequences and effects on our lives. If you want to change an entire country and the people and it's culture, then logic is most definitely need. Emotions tend to really frustrate people because most want a good reason for the change, since not all change is for the better. Constantly insulting people because it makes one feels good to do so, only damages things and it is how we get crap leaders period.

So politics is where logic is needed.

Parenting is also a good use and place for logic, if you want your children to be happy and productive and contributing members of society.

But, I also believe that people have the right to their beliefs and opinions and if they want to keep it to themselves in their own little corner of the world, then I have no problem with it.

I also firmly believe that nobody has the right to impose their beliefs on to people.

When people want to interact with others, and change others, then there needs to be a justification. Not just an excuse. Logic is a good tool for that kind of justification.

I'm not sure if that makes sense to you.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Yeah, there's a reason.


Are you able to say when you think it's not necessary?

Could you give a few examples of that?
EB

I'm not sure I can.

In politics, I try to use it because, like it or not, politics does often have personal consequences and effects on our lives. If you want to change an entire country and the people and it's culture, then logic is most definitely need. Emotions tend to really frustrate people because most want a good reason for the change, since not all change is for the better. Constantly insulting people because it makes one feels good to do so, only damages things and it is how we get crap leaders period.

So politics is where logic is needed.

Parenting is also a good use and place for logic, if you want your children to be happy and productive and contributing members of society.

But, I also believe that people have the right to their beliefs and opinions and if they want to keep it to themselves in their own little corner of the world, then I have no problem with it.

I also firmly believe that nobody has the right to impose their beliefs on to people.

When people want to interact with others, and change others, then there needs to be a justification. Not just an excuse. Logic is a good tool for that kind of justification.

I'm not sure if that makes sense to you.

Yeah, it does.

You believe experience allows you to infer good rules to follow whenever there is a need for action, and you think that logic lies in applying those rules to specific cases that come to your knowledge. Applying those rules to those specific cases allows you to draw what you regard as necessary conclusions such as for example what you should do in each case.

And I'm Ok with that.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Whoop! Whoop!

 

[Speakpigeon]

Whoop! Whoop!

Let me guess: Orangutan? Gorilla? Chimpanzee? Bonobo?
EB

 

[Rayschism]

Whoop! Whoop!

Let me guess: Orangutan? Gorilla? Chimpanzee? Bonobo?
EB

Right turn Clyde.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Let me guess: Orangutan? Gorilla? Chimpanzee? Bonobo?
EB

Right turn Clyde.

Thanks.

Wrong turn Clyde more like.
EB

 

[Phil Scott]

For the last decade, I've been using computer based programs for stating and verifying deductive arguments for mathematical theorems, and for checking the correctness of computer programs, so I work with deductive logic quite aggressively day-to-day. To be fair, the computer does a lot of the work, and is much better when it comes to fiddly details. I mostly think about the proofs a few levels up.