LOGIC: Current alternative views on our ordinary logical sense

[fromderinside]

What the? If there were no intuitive feel of logic then we wouldnt have the formal version of logic at all.
We do have a very intuitive ground for making deductions.

Excellent. You reacted to my assertion. Now that's a feeling response if ever. Intuition for logic, on the other hand, is not mere feeling reaction at all.

Clearly we are behaviorally organized as approximations to that we experience. However, an intuition of logic requires consciousness to be articulated, something we rarely do, except for some swearing, in unthinking reaction to what we process from the world. Clearly intuition is a conscious product, one related to a reflex only by conscious experience, which I will insist is not either reaction or involuntary feeling. Its sits there with old wives wisdom, common sense, and other largely automated by nearly unanimous previous outcome experiences individually learned or having been drummed into our heads before we could talk. Intuition is never reflexively generated.

Now as to whether it is necessary for such an articulated experience as a basis for logic is also in doubt. The scientific process actually is designed to minimize contamination of observation with such as gut feeling or intuition. Science arose along with our natrivistic, feeling based, experience. However, feelings need need to be neutralized if we were to actually objectively understand the world about us so scientific thinking stands opposed to nativist thinking, not as arising from it.

So while it may comfort you to believe logic arose from instinct or feeling, it clearly doesn't except as folk this or folk that.

The distinction between rational deduction (folk whatever) is as wide and bright linedly different from scientific deduction as I can imagine.

As far as I can tell Speakpigeon confuses rational processes with scientific processes to arrive at his science of logic.

 

[Speakpigeon]

As far as I can tell Speakpigeon confuses rational processes with scientific processes to arrive at his science of logic.

First Question: How your view here would be relevant to this thread? Or is it just a hunch you have?

Second Question: What did I say in this thread that you think justifies your view here?


Just have a look again at the OP below if that can help.

Me, I don't think I would confuse whatever I do with a scientific process, if that can put your worst nightmare to rest.
EB

I'm going to have a bit more time to invest on fundamental research on logic. I think some of you here have real expertise on the subject to share.

I'm only really interested in the kind of logic that normally intelligent human beings seem to be able to apply, or use, intuitively, what I would call our "logical sense", or "sense of logic", something I believe we have without having first to think about it in any formal way. If you disagree with that, please explain.

So, if you know of any theory of that kind of logic, beyond the one proposed initially by Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, that you happen to like and value, I'd like to hear any reasons you may have for that.

And, additionally, I'm just curious to see how many people around here will be interested!
EB

 

[fromderinside]

As far as I can tell Speakpigeon confuses rational processes with scientific processes to arrive at his science of logic.

First Question: How your view here would be relevant to this thread? Or is it just a hunch you have?

Second Question: What did I say in this thread that you think justifies your view here?


Just have a look again at the OP below if that can help.

Me, I don't think I would confuse whatever I do with a scientific process, if that can put your worst nightmare to rest.
EB

I'm going to have a bit more time to invest on fundamental research on logic. I think some of you here have real expertise on the subject to share.

I'm only really interested in the kind of logic that normally intelligent human beings seem to be able to apply, or use, intuitively, what I would call our "logical sense", or "sense of logic", something I believe we have without having first to think about it in any formal way. If you disagree with that, please explain.

So, if you know of any theory of that kind of logic, beyond the one proposed initially by Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, that you happen to like and value, I'd like to hear any reasons you may have for that.

And, additionally, I'm just curious to see how many people around here will be interested!
EB

I just went over my objections to intuition and logical sense other than as foraml logic science with Juma, to which post you responded.

If you want to conflate logic with rational that is your privilege. Keep in mind it isn't objective or philosophical at all therefore it is only worthy of preachers.

Fine. If that, have your day.

 

[Speakpigeon]

I just went over my objections to intuition and logical sense other than as foraml logic science with Juma, to which post you responded.

I'm perfectly happy with the idea of formal logic. I'm pretty sure this comes out of my various posts where I compare formal logic to our formal rules for addition and multiplication. If you think formal logic is more than that, it's up to you to make your case.

Me, I think formal logic should be understood as an extension of our (intuitive) sense of logic just as the rules for addition and multiplication are extension of our intuitive ideas about addition and multiplication. So, I think I need to start from our intuitive sense and from syllogistic logic, which I think expressed pretty much what Aristotle and a few others felt intuitively about logic, i.e. their sense of logic.

I'm not even clear that there could be anything much to disagree about that. But it's true you keep defeating my expectations..

If you want to conflate logic with rational that is your privilege.

I don't conflate anything here. I remain agnostic as to the nature of logic, if there's such a thing.

I can only want to start from our sense of logic because this is all I believe I could possibly know of logic, if anything. If you know of any empirical fount of knowledge about logic, outside human minds, I'd be interested. I don't expect you do but it's true you keep defeating my expectations. So, go on, surprise me.

Keep in mind it isn't objective or philosophical at all therefore it is only worthy of preachers.

You should realise you can only possibly be preaching here, at best.

And, then, sorry, I'm lost as to your meaning, yet again. Bad preaching I guess.

If you meant that it is logic that "isn't objective or philosophical", you should have started with that. I would have agreed with that until I could receive proof that it's wrong.

Fine. If that, have your day.

Thanks. Much appreciated.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Well there you go. thread completely wrapped around it's self definitions.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Well there you go. thread completely wrapped around it's self definitions.

Thanks, FDI. Always at the front line.

You have to be right, of course. You have to. Even if I don't know why.

That explains why people couldn't really contribute anything much.

They've understood immediately the sheer futility of addressing the OP.

Except you, apparently. It did take you quite a while.

I guess that should clear up things, if not for me.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Mark Anthony Is that you without the ears?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Just let my pigs go!
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Wow. You're well informed.  Pig War your people weren't even involved in that. "54^o 40' or fight!"

swine die?

 

[Speakpigeon]

Wow. You're well informed.  Pig War

No about that, no. It's all news to me.

You said Mark Anthony. I thought you meant Saint Anthony rather than the Roman general, Mark Antony.

Here's a still-life of Saint Anthony's pig:

your people weren't even involved in that.

I have known a few Germans over the years and I also visited there several times for my job, different places. I liked most of them, people and cities. I also spent one year over there doing my national military duties while still a young man, a long time ago, mostly fighting the German mosquitoes there.

A few years ago, I surprised myself by finding I felt somehow more akin to the Germans than to the French and more comfortable in German towns than in French ones.

And yet both my grand-fathers fought in WWI and one of them, an aviator, was killed.

We're more complicated than many people like to pretend.

"54^o 40' or fight!"

swine die?

I'm all for borders so that there's at least something to cross and I enjoyed doing that a lot.

But perhaps not to the point that we should fight over them.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

You seem to be responding to two posts here. Conflating language origins is one thing, politics and border disagreements are another.

 

[Speakpigeon]

Either way it's all a derail.
EB

Nota Bene - I should start to work on a new system any time soon.

 

[fromderinside]

Nine. Yes. Nine would be nice .....