..

No one comes to believe things because of logic. — T Clark

That's actually not true. People vary in how much they trust logic. Some can march, one logical step at a time, to amazing effect.

Others flop around uselessly, not to mention any names.

That's actually not true. People vary in how much they trust logic. Some can march, one logical step at a time, to amazing effect. — frank

Deductive logic only operates on propositions. The propositions have to come from somewhere. If you follow a logical chain of propositions back to the beginning, you'll come to one that can't be generated by deductive logic.

Propositions can be generated by inductive logic. Following a standard scientific type process, you start with observations, use them to generate hypotheses, and then test those hypotheses against further observations. Logic of either type is not able to make the step from the original observation to hypothesis. That requires insight, intuition.

Everything I know, think, feel, and believe reflects "personal context" rather than logic. No one comes to believe things because of logic. Logic does not generate knowledge or understanding. — T Clark

Yes. My mum used to say something like you can't reason someone out of a position that wasn't arrived at through reason. Is there much point in debate or dialogue if worldviews like pessimism are derived and held outside of reason? Some people plainly do change their positions, but I wonder to what extent this is driven by an internal process rather than exposure to argument. Probably off topic, right?

This would remove a lot of the 'chronic dissatisfaction and an inability to find joy,' you suggest is so currently prominent. — universeness

I was referring to those who embrace pessimism and antinatalism with some dedication, not to general dissatisfaction with culture and politics. A whole different debate, I suspect.

Deductive logic only operates on propositions. The propositions have to come from somewhere. If you follow a logical chain of propositions back to the beginning, you'll come to one that can't be generated by deductive logic. — T Clark

Sure, but much can be accomplished by using deductive reasoning on premises that are sufficiently verifiable. And so-called "hinge propositions" aren't usually a matter of personal taste. They emerge from your form: physically, psychologically, and culturally.

Propositions can be generated by inductive logic. Following a standard scientific type process, you start with observations, use them to generate hypotheses, and then test those hypotheses against further observations. — T Clark

That's not inductive reasoning. Induction is like when you see the sun rise in the east every morning and conclude that the sun always rises in the east.

Perhaps we should start a thread on induction. It's a fascinating topic. :smile:

E.g. do you think universeness's opposition to anti-natalism comes from logic? His baloney gestures to logic are just a cover to support his desire that ideas he doesn't agree with should be censored. — T Clark

You are just typing inaccurate trash about me TC. I seem to occupy much more space in your head than you do in mine. If you want to try to counter my arguments then do so directly, rather than this poor attempt by proxy. I think you should look again at the relationship individuals have between their beliefs and their application of logic. By doing so, you may eventually escape your dalliances and irrational defence of theists. Do the words in the offering below hold an important place in your heart TC?

"Top Cat?" We call it Don Gato in Spain :sweat:

That's not inductive reasoning. Induction is like when you see the sun rise in the east every morning and conclude that the sun always rises in the east. — frank

OR, you might conclude that the sun does not rise at all, it is the Earth that turns.

Yeah, different languages but same character types!