People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Hawknc, Zamfir, Prelates, Moderators General

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:09 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:sourmìlk, what exactly do you mean by "logic"?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:10 pm UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:
eran_rathan wrote:
Dauric wrote:
Zamfir wrote:EDIT: Ooo, and at the end you have to throw the constitution in Mount Helens, and the movie will be named National Precious


If the quest is literary then that might not be a bad thing as long as we get Peter Jackson to be the director. If the quest is a RPG the movie is likely to be directed by Uwe Boll.


hmm...I was going to say, "As long as it's not Micheal Bay," but then stopped myself - Worst case scenario, I'm sure we can all agree, is the two of them being co-directors.

I'm not so sure. Michael Bay only gets one thing right (explosions) but Uwe Boll gets nothing right so the combination of the two of them will be at worst as bad as Uwe Boll.


Limx-> Uwe BollX+C = Uwe Boll? That's terrifying.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby lutzj » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:23 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:If there is insufficient information to draw a correct conclusion, then application of logic on true premises will necessarily lead to the best conclusion, or at worst show that we have insufficient information to draw a conclusion.


No, especially if one is employing the hard deduction you seem to favor so much. People operated under the false premise that the Sun revolved around the Earth for centuries and, until the telescope, the knowledge needed to assume otherwise was beyond the bounds of what humans could observe. Assuming that the Sun revolved around the Earth before that point was perfectly backed-up by accurate observations and valid deductive logic.


sourmìlk wrote:As for abortion as a contradiction to the idea that we hold similar ethical axioms: usually the argument that fetuses have souls isn't taken as axiomatic, its based on something the Bible says or perceived scientific evidence, and is ultimately refutable.


You might be able to refute the notion of souls as precisely laid down in the Bible, but you'll have a hard time conclusively disproving the moral importance of a fetus without the use of your own unprovable axioms. If you could, we'd all love to hear your analysis.
Last edited by lutzj on Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:25 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.
User avatar
lutzj
 
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby induction » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:24 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Either logic necessarily leads to correct conclusions...

roughly .001% of the time

or truth is unknowable (or is subjective).

the rest of the time. (Bolded part mine.)

And again, I recognize that people often assume false premises, but they can usually be shown to be false.


Just a few posts ago, for your benefit, we enacted a mock argument to demonstrate that people very often disagree on axioms, which leads to different conclusions. Neither of these axioms can be shown to be false without circular reasoning.

Recap:
position 1: The Constitution has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: The Constitution

position2: God has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: God
induction
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:00 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Diadem » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:27 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:Were you under the impression that the true meaning of love involves being a colony of Britain? There's no gay marriage there.

Perhaps they are a Canadian colony. Or a Dutch one. Or a South-African one.

I'm going to go with "Canadian colony". Except for New York. That's ours.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister
User avatar
Diadem
 
Posts: 4864
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Silknor » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:30 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:As for abortion as a contradiction to the idea that we hold similar ethical axioms: usually the argument that fetuses have souls isn't taken as axiomatic, its based on something the Bible says or perceived scientific evidence, and is ultimately refutable.


You see it as refutable. But I doubt anyone who takes as a matter of faith that the Bible is the literal word of God would agree with you. How can you refute the idea that homosexual behavior is a sin? Or that a soul is present from the moment of conception (which is really just the same challenge as proving that souls do not exist, either in the physical observable world or elsewhere). These are not falsifiable claims. They are not claims that can be proven or disproven, only believed or not believed, assumed on faith or not assumed.

I support marriage equality, but I don't hold out a second's hope that anyone who doesn't will be convinced by the argument eran_rathan made or any other logical argument. Why? Because they're all going to be based on premises that not everybody holds.

@lutzj: I don't think this is true. What it sounds like in that example is that the observations weren't accurate enough to distinguish the two (not yet competing) hypothesis. Logic would dictate then that we could not conclude which is accurate. Logic prevents us from saying: the data fits our hypothesis to within (what by today's standards would be very large) experimental error, therefore our hypothesis is true.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding
User avatar
Silknor
 
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:31 pm UTC

induction wrote:Recap:
position 1: The Constitution has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: The Constitution

position2: God has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: God


rebuttal of position2: gods have no say on what is legal. "Render unto Caesar..."
source: a god (or demi-god, or whatever - zombie maybe?).
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Dauric » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:31 pm UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:I'm not so sure. Michael Bay only gets one thing right (explosions) but Uwe Boll gets nothing right so the combination of the two of them will be at worst as bad as Uwe Boll.


... A movie that gets explosions wrong?

I can only imagine it would be like this.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. Later, Garrus was eaten by a shark. It is believed that the Point has perished in the accident. Back to you Bob.
User avatar
Dauric
 
Posts: 3169
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: If I knew this with any accuracy I wouldn't know if I was going to get a speeding ticket.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:33 pm UTC

lutzj wrote:
No, especially if one is employing the hard deduction you seem to favor so much. People operated under the false premise that the Sun revolved around the Earth for centuries and, until the telescope, the knowledge needed to assume otherwise was beyond the bounds of what humans could observe. Assuming that the Sun revolved around the Earth before that point was perfectly backed-up by accurate observations and valid deductive logic.

But through the use of proper observation and logic we arrived at the correct conclusion. I didn't say it didn't take a while.


induction wrote:roughly .001% of the time

All scientific discoveries comprise .001% of the time?

the rest of the time. (Bolded part mine.)

A subjective truth is sort of a contradiction. If something is subjective, it doesn't really have a truth value.

Just a few posts ago, for your benefit, we enacted a mock argument to demonstrate that people very often disagree on axioms, which leads to different conclusions. Neither of these axioms can be shown to be false without circular reasoning.

Recap:
position 1: The Constitution has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: The Constitution

position2: God has the final say on what should or shouldn't be legal.
source: God


Neither of those things need to be taken as axiomatic, thus it is illogical to do so.

Silknor wrote:You see it as refutable. But I doubt anyone who takes as a matter of faith that the Bible is the literal word of God would agree with you.


They're wrong.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby lutzj » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:36 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
lutzj wrote:
No, especially if one is employing the hard deduction you seem to favor so much. People operated under the false premise that the Sun revolved around the Earth for centuries and, until the telescope, the knowledge needed to assume otherwise was beyond the bounds of what humans could observe. Assuming that the Sun revolved around the Earth before that point was perfectly backed-up by accurate observations and valid deductive logic.

But through the use of proper observation and logic we arrived at the correct conclusion. I didn't say it didn't take a while.


How do you know that our current understanding is correct?
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.
User avatar
lutzj
 
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:37 pm UTC

...how do I know that the Earth orbits the sun?

Observation of the movements of bodies in this solar system relative to us, observation of the solar system via probes sent out by us, proven laws of gravity from Newton to Einstein, etc. There are no potential facts that could possibly arrive to show that the solar system is geocentric.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:41 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:sourmìlk, what exactly do you mean by "logic"?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Princess Marzipan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:42 pm UTC

sourmilk wrote:There are no potential facts that could possibly arrive to show that the solar system is geocentric.
False!
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.
User avatar
Princess Marzipan
Bananas are fish who attack divers inland
 
Posts: 7719
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby induction » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:43 pm UTC

sourmilk wrote:All scientific discoveries comprise .001% of the time?

at most. You don't think the whole gay marriage debate is a scientific question do you?

A subjective truth is sort of a contradiction. If something is subjective, it doesn't really have a truth value.

I think you're assuming a binary system of truth values. This does not apply to most of the things we have public debates about.

Neither of those things need to be taken as axiomatic, thus it is illogical to do so.

Please explain.
induction
 
Posts: 241
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:00 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Meteoric » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:45 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:They're wrong.

But for this topic, it doesn't matter even if we can prove them conclusively and objectively wrong. As long as we're voting on the issue, or voting for people who will legislate on the issue, their opinion matters. Logic alone is (apparently) not working. Adding some emotional appeal to support that logic helps convince people.
No, even in theory, you cannot build a rocket more massive than the visible universe.
Meteoric
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:43 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:46 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:...how do I know that the Earth orbits the sun?

Observation of the movements of bodies in this solar system relative to us, observation of the solar system via probes sent out by us, proven laws of gravity from Newton to Einstein, etc. There are no potential facts that could possibly arrive to show that the solar system is geocentric.


(emphasis mine)

Fundamentalism at its finest.

Before you start to berate me, hear me out: You are refusing to acknowledge any evidence contrary to your currently held synthesis of belief, regardless. That is more or less the definition of fundamentalism: instead of altering your beliefs to fit the facts, altering (or refusing to accept) the facts to fit your beliefs.

EDIT: Also, it depends on your reference frame.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Silknor » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:47 pm UTC

lutzj wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:But through the use of proper observation and logic we arrived at the correct conclusion. I didn't say it didn't take a while.


How do you know that our current understanding is correct?


We don't know our current understanding is correct. We may have strong evidence in favor of it, and overwhelming evidence against every alternative theory we've devised, yet we still don't truly know it's correct. But we don't have to be positive our current understanding is correct in order for it to be useful knowledge, of course.

@sourmilk:
They're wrong.


I doubt you could prove that to the satisfaction of a neutral observer, but this illustrates the problem with relying on logic to try to convince people on ethics. No doubt you can reach a conclusion you're sure is right with the strictest of logic, but you'd be just as foolish as you think the "literal word of God" crowd is if you think you can actually convince one of them with that logic.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding
User avatar
Silknor
 
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:51 pm UTC

induction wrote:
sourmilk wrote:All scientific discoveries comprise .001% of the time?

at most. You don't think the whole gay marriage debate is a scientific question do you?

No.

Before you start to berate me, hear me out: You are refusing to acknowledge any evidence contrary to your currently held synthesis of belief, regardless. That is more or less the definition of fundamentalism: instead of altering your beliefs to fit the facts, altering (or refusing to accept) the facts to fit your beliefs.

EDIT: Also, it depends on your reference frame.

If facts were to arise that challenged that then I would change my opinion, but it's impossible that facts would arise to prove a geocentric universe. This isn't fundamentalism, it's logic: any observation of a geocentric universe would contradict observation of a heliocentric solar system, and thus is impossible. QED.

I doubt you could prove that to the satisfaction of a neutral observer, but this illustrates the problem with relying on logic to try to convince people on ethics. No doubt you can reach a conclusion you're sure is right with the strictest of logic, but you'd be just as foolish as you think the "literal word of God" crowd is if you think you can actually convince one of them with that logic.

I know people aren't convinced by logic. My whole point is that that makes me sad.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Ghostbear » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:52 pm UTC

This whole topic might have gone meta, I think: someone is choosing to rely on an emotional conclusion despite logic being provided to them to the contrary.
Ghostbear
 
Posts: 1764
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 10:06 pm UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Zamfir » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:54 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
induction wrote:roughly .001% of the time

All scientific discoveries comprise .001% of the time?

Actually, scientific discoveries are a typical example of inductive reasoning: deriving general conclusions from special cases. And as far we know, there exists no inductive logic with the same hard guarantees as deductive logic.

Which is pretty clear if you look at the history of science. Scientific discoveries are obviously not proven with the same rigour as mathematical deductions. They often turn out wrong, and most of them are known to be approximate. AKA "wrong"in your lingo.

I am sorry, but science just doesn't live up to sourmilkian standards of reasoning.
User avatar
Zamfir
 
Posts: 6257
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Silknor » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:55 pm UTC

@Sourmilk:
But of course, the reason that some aren't convinced by your logic on these issues isn't that logic isn't perfect, all powerful, and fully capable of proving that your view is the only correct one on X issue, but rather that the people who disagree with you are ignorant of your logic, deeply irrational, etc.

This is a surprisingly common view, one I've heard in many places, from many people. It's almost as if they were clinging to the omnipotence of their logic in spite of logic itself...
Last edited by Silknor on Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:57 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding
User avatar
Silknor
 
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:57 pm UTC

I have a hypothesis. Would it be acceptable if I said that a proper application of logic leads to the best conclusion that is possible to attain?

Silknor, I make no guesses as to the motivation behind people's disagreement with me. It might be a gut reaction, it could be a misapplication of logical thought, I don't know.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:02 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Before you start to berate me, hear me out: You are refusing to acknowledge any evidence contrary to your currently held synthesis of belief, regardless. That is more or less the definition of fundamentalism: instead of altering your beliefs to fit the facts, altering (or refusing to accept) the facts to fit your beliefs.

EDIT: Also, it depends on your reference frame.

If facts were to arise that challenged that then I would change my opinion, but it's impossible that facts would arise to prove a geocentric universe. This isn't fundamentalism, it's logic: any observation of a geocentric universe would contradict observation of a heliocentric solar system, and thus is impossible. QED.


I'd like to point you out to the idea of inertial and non-inertial frames of reference, mate. Also the equivalence principle, Lorentz contraction, and a number of other weirdness that derives from relativity.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:04 pm UTC

I know there's weird relativistic stuff to specify when we say that the Earth orbits the sun, but I think we're assuming that's specified in such a way that the Earth orbits the sun for these purposes.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Radical_Initiator » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:06 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I know there's weird relativistic stuff to specify when we say that the Earth orbits the sun, but I think we're assuming that's specified in such a way that the Earth orbits the sun for these purposes.

Why would we do that?
I looked out across the river today …
Radical_Initiator
Just Cool Enough for School
 
Posts: 1375
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:39 pm UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:07 pm UTC

For the sake of argument?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:08 pm UTC

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:sourmìlk, what exactly do you mean by "logic"?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:09 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I know there's weird relativistic stuff to specify when we say that the Earth orbits the sun, but I think we're assuming that's specified in such a way that the Earth orbits the sun for these purposes.



also:

TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:sourmìlk, what exactly do you mean by "logic"?
Last edited by eran_rathan on Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:09 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:09 pm UTC

I don't understand the question. Do you want me to define logic?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Meteoric » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:10 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I have a hypothesis. Would it be acceptable if I said that a proper application of logic leads to the best conclusion that is possible to attain?

For some values of "proper", "best", and "possible" sure. But getting everybody to agree on those is at least as hard as, and probably much harder than, convincing them of the original argument ("gay marriage should be legal") in the first place.
No, even in theory, you cannot build a rocket more massive than the visible universe.
Meteoric
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:43 am UTC

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:12 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I don't understand the question. Do you want me to define logic?

Yes. Terms like "logic" and "right" and "subjective" and "best" and "reason" and "observation" are entering this discussion much faster than definitions. In that definitions aren't entering at all.

So the question is for you to define "logic."
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:13 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I don't understand the question. Do you want me to define logic?



Yes, I think that would be reasonable. Also; no axioms, predicates, a priori assumptions, or undefined terms. Have fun.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:14 pm UTC

Meteoric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:I have a hypothesis. Would it be acceptable if I said that a proper application of logic leads to the best conclusion that is possible to attain?

For some values of "proper", "best", and "possible" sure. But getting everybody to agree on those is at least as hard as, and probably much harder than, convincing them of the original argument ("gay marriage should be legal") in the first place.

"Possible" being the best conclusion that can be reached given current known or determinable premises, "best" being of the highest truth value (as determined by logic), and "proper" being the use of valid logic on premises that we know to be true.

logicn: Reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity

eran_rathan wrote:Also; no axioms, predicates, a priori assumptions, or undefined terms.

Why? I already said that logic requires some axioms.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby Zamfir » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:17 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I don't understand the question. Do you want me to define logic?

It would already help if just gave a vague impression what you include and do not include in the concept. You appear to use the word for many things that are not typically included, like observations and scientific discoveries.
User avatar
Zamfir
 
Posts: 6257
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:17 pm UTC

Ok. So "All dolphins are pink; I am a dolphin; ∴ I am pink" is a valid argument. But weren't you just saying that this is illogical?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:18 pm UTC

I added that logic and observation (i.e. as separate entities) were necessary for determining truth.

Bolshevik: I said that it was an improper application of logic as its based on demonstrably false premises.

I'm confused, I thought this board was pro-science. Why are we suddenly dismissing logic and observation as a means of determining truth?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby lutzj » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:20 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I added that logic and observation (i.e. as separate entities) were necessary for determining truth.

Bolshevik: I said that it was an improper application of logic as its based on demonstrably false premises.

I'm confused, I thought this board was pro-science. Why are we suddenly dismissing logic and observation as a means of determining truth?


We're not dismissing the use of logic and observation, rather the notion that logical analysis always results in truth. Otherwise Socrates would have figured everything out and there'd be no more philosophy to do.
Last edited by lutzj on Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:21 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
addams wrote:I'm not a bot.
That is what a bot would type.
User avatar
lutzj
 
Posts: 889
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 6:20 am UTC
Location: Ontario

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby eran_rathan » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:20 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I added that logic and observation (i.e. as separate entities) were necessary for determining truth.

Bolshevik: I said that it was an improper application of logic as its based on demonstrably false premises.

I'm confused, I thought this board was pro-science. Why are we suddenly dismissing logic and observation as a means of determining truth?


We are, we just understand its limitations.
"Greyarcher":Trying to build a proper foundation for knowledge is blippery.
"JimsMaher":Squirrels are crazy enough to be test pilots.
The Velocirapture is Imminent! Image
User avatar
eran_rathan
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in ur forum, killing ur threads :(

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby sourmìlk » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:22 pm UTC

lutzj wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:I added that logic and observation (i.e. as separate entities) were necessary for determining truth.

Bolshevik: I said that it was an improper application of logic as its based on demonstrably false premises.

I'm confused, I thought this board was pro-science. Why are we suddenly dismissing logic and observation as a means of determining truth?


We're not dismissing the use of logic and observation, rather the notion that logical analysis always results in truth. Otherwise Socrates would have figured everything out and there'd be no more philosophy to do.


I later appended that we needed observation.

eran_rathan wrote:We are, we just understand its limitations.

What do you think those are? (I know that there exist some, I'm just wondering what you think there are).
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.
User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
 
Posts: 6407
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong

Re: People choose emotions over reason, no one is surprised

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 05, 2012 9:22 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Bolshevik: I said that it was an improper application of logic as its based on demonstrably false premises.

There's nothing in logic that says that you have to use true premises. Not in the definition that you gave, anyway (but also not in anything I've gotten from studying the stuff formally). So now you have this extralogical notion of when it's proper to use logic. Could you define that?
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.
TheGrammarBolshevik
 
Posts: 4562
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Where.

PreviousNext

Return to News & Articles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gametaku and 6 guests