There may indeed be many things beyond logic, or for which logical analysis is unsuitable. — Wayfarer
Of course [one] is correct. — Wayfarer
Have you considered what would come of things, if we were to reject identity, the 1st law?
onto/logical: x = x
propositional: p ⇔ p
You may consider it a working presumption, if you like, which enables all kinds of things, including our talk. — jorndoe
Therefore, could logic be that relation/connection, that path, between the 'something' and the truth? — BrianW
Logic is about language only, and not about the world itself. — ChatteringMonkey
What then justifies the validity of the path? — TheMadFool
That’s pretty right, but it’s also more than that. Logic would be impossible without abstraction and generalisation, which in turn are constituents of language itself [as well as arithmetic]. And then it turns out that logic can be used to discover, or disclose, things about the world that we wouldn’t otherwise know, which actually is a remarkable thing, that is often taken for granted. — Wayfarer
Logic is about language only, and not about the world itself. — ChatteringMonkey
If this were true, then deductive arguments would have no application in empirical science.
However, deductive arguments do apply to empirical science.
Therefore this is not true. — Wayfarer
Buridan's ass was prey to indecisiveness that - hypothetically - caused it to starve.I feel like Buridan's ass right now.
Please help — TheMadFool
It seems to me you're getting along just fine. — andrewk
The answer my philosophy prof. gave to the question of "justifying" logic was that it worked "because it had better" work. And I think there's something to this. I hear in it the acknowledgement that the search for some - any - ultimate ground is futile and ultimately naive and un-mature, that the most one gets is efficacy.When somebody asks whether logic is justified or not, — TheMadFool
The answer my philosophy prof. gave to the question of "justifying" logic was that it worked "because it had better" work. And I think there's something to this. I hear in it the acknowledgement that the search for some - any - ultimate ground is futile and ultimately naive and un-mature, that the most one gets is efficacy. — tim wood
Logic’s justification can be grounded in its ability to find truths. Basically, if logic gets to truths then that’s a justification of its principles and ergo itself. — TheMadFool
And a pretty good one, imho. Now break it down and watch it evaporate even as you watch. The catch lies in the hypotheses and the presuppositions. It's all good if they're good - but are they good/good enough? I think they're not, and that it simply doesn't matter.Here’s a kinda-sorta “proof”: — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.