Speakpigeon
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6,317
- Location
- Paris, France, EU
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationality (i.e. facts + logic), Scepticism (not just about God but also everything beyond my subjective experience)
SpeakPigeon wrote:I expect this system to reflect our intuitions, or our sense of logic, or at least most people's sense of logic if we can agree on what that is
Every thing in your post is subject to challenge from the perspective that each human, although human, is unique, therefore one needs a filter or many filters to arrive at a 'logic of consensus' which is not at all an individual human logic.
Your plate if full sir and you've about admitted it is impossible.
I fail to see how the problem of logic would be significantly more intractable than say, any scientific question, and in particular the scientific investigation of the human mind.
Syllogistic logic does seem like proper logic to me and I believe most people who understand it feel it's alright. So, while I'm not sure it's too useful, I take it to show that we have at least that much logic in common (save possibly for a small minority of "illogical" people). The question I'm interested in is whether it's possible to extend this core logic into something operational and more obviously useful. That might be something impossible to get but I wouldn't bet on that.
EB