Yes and no questions? Really? :-}

Do you mean 'bivalent logic'? There is also multivalent and paraconsistent logics.

Thoughts can be composed in many ways, and we can think about worlds composed in many ways, but they would be thoughts, not worlds.

The fact that the world around us is analog rather than digital has been widely accepted for a long time and quantum mechanics have already been used to prove life is metaphorical rather than metaphysical. The problem is that digital logic inevitably leads to logical contradictions it can't resolve any better than to just deny something is possible. Digital logic, for example, insisted that the earth must be flat for thousands of years because, obviously, it can't be both flat and round! Analog can overcome these problems by simply assuming everything is context dependent and adapting to whatever the situation requires. An analog computer like the brain, for example, produces analogs or metaphors of whatever problem it is attempting to solve rather than insisting the evidence conform to the logic.

Digital logic is also horribly inefficient and just not viable when you start crunching the kinds of enormous numbers the brain routinely does, but that's just another way of saying that reality is analog because you can derive digital logic from analog, but not vice versa. The advantages of digital logic are that it is easier to do error correction and use a more brute force approach to problem solving which, for example, is why digital logic is used in computers when it takes up much more space on a chip and is much more inefficient. Manufacturers have been counting on the fact that the chips keep shrinking so fast they don't have to worry about its drawbacks, but are currently focusing much more on analog logic as Moore's Law is about to end up in the toilet.

Digital logic, for example, insisted that the earth must be flat for thousands of years because, obviously, it can't be both flat and round! — wuliheron

It has been the orthodox belief that the Earth is flat neither for thousands of years or thousands of seconds! The Flat Earth Society would have been considered just as weird in 2016 BC as it is today!

Oh, how silly of me.

I'm having trouble defining the differences between them. Examples would help immensely.

quantum mechanics have already been used to prove life is metaphorical rather than metaphysical — wuliheron

What do you mean by life is metaphorical? Life is a metaphor for what exactly?

Quantum mechanics proves anything and everything for this poster. I wouldn't trouble yourself.

A paradox is an example of a metaphor in that it has no clear identity. We are the belief makers, we give it all meaning, and in doing so create our own metaphors. Socrates used the metaphors of the memory of God and repeatedly proclaiming that the only thing he knew was that he knew nothing.

Yes and no questions? Really? :-} — Barry Etheridge

I mean, that is binary, lol

Unlike the world thoughts have the disjoint syntax of our language, they are easily detachable, and dependent on a network of things to think about etc The world, however, is continuous, non-detachable, and the whole of all things that exist independently of our thoughts about them.

"Bivalent logic" as someone else pointed out. That's the name you'll run across more often in a philosophical milieu.

Anyway, "What's wrong with it?" Well, who said there's something wrong with it for us to wonder what's wrong with it in the first place? Some context would help. It's certainly useful in many contexts. In other contexts, a lot might be wrong with it. Like if we're trying to write poetry. It's not very useful for that in my opinion.

''If you're not with us, then you're against us'': G. Bush

As the above quote clearly demonstrates there's something fundamentally deficient in binary logic in the sense that it fails to capture the fine nuances of our world. This is classically expressed in the fallacy of the false dilemma.

Not at all. It is possible to define all of mathematics, including the continuum, using just what you refer to as binary logic. The GW Bush example has nothing to do with the fact that logic uses a True/False paradigm. It's to do with somebody assuming there are only two possibilities when in fact there are many more, possibly even an infinite number of them.

Not silly. Almost everybody does it. I think when people refer to Flat Earthers they are really thinking of GeoCentrists, ie people who believe the Earth is the centre of the universe.

Genuine Flat Earthers are extremely difficult to find in any age.

I gave up on pointing the misnomer out a few years ago, because it's so common.

It lines up alongside references to the Dark Side of the Moon, which phrase people use thinking they are indicating a mysterious, unknowable place. Even Pink Floyd got this wrong. It's the Far Side of the Moon that is mysterious and was never seen by humans until the Apollo missions went there. And that Far Side is bathed in sunlight about 50% of the time.

Pedantry expostulation concluded.

Even Pink Floyd got this wrong. — andrewk

As the spoken section of Eclipse specifically includes "There is no dark side of the moon really." this assertion would appear to erroneous! In any case, 'dark' does not only mean 'not lighted' but includes such subtleties as 'unseen', 'hidden', 'obscured', 'arcane' etc. as in 'the dark arts', 'I saw through a mirror darkly', and, of course, 'dark matter'. It is therefore entirely appropriate to call that side of the moon which we never see 'dark' irrespective of the amount of daylight it enjoys.

But you're right about the flat Earth thing! (Y)

I hadn't noticed that statement in the spoken section. I'll go and listen for it. I'm relieved to learn that the Floyd did not make such a mistake.