[lbo-talk] Logic - was No Evidence ...

Devine, James jdevine at lmu.edu
Thu Sep 18 14:15:29 PDT 2003


I can't stop myself from going over quota.

When people talk about humans not being "logical," does that refer only to the formal or informal use of Aristotelian logic or similar (mathematics, etc.)? If so, the problem may not be that people aren't logical as much as being unable to abstract very well. After all, such logic involves a very abstract picture in our heads, one that doesn't correspond to the messy complications of the reality that exists independent of our individual perceptions of it. Empirical reality doesn't seem to fit into logical either/or type categories. Also, such logic isn't exactly about "truth," since good logical argument can be based on false premises.

Methinks that most people aren't logical in that way as much as they apply rules of thumb, heuristics, empirically-based knowledge, wisdom learned from others, etc. Most people haven't had the luxury to dabble in abstraction, but are forced to figure out how to survive and even do well in the complicated natural and societal environments they face.

------------------------ Jim Devine jdevine at lmu.edu & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine


> -----Original Message-----
> From: boddhisatva [mailto:boddhisatva at netzero.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 1:52 PM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: [lbo-talk] Logic - was No Evidence ...
>
>
>
>
> Dear C.s,
>
> Dwayne Monroe really interested me in this file because
> that Lem story he
> points out questions some fundamental things about human nature.
>
> I would suggest that we ask what the logical human purpose
> of human logic
> is? By this I mean to ask whether the natural purpose of
> human logic is for
> an individual to develop an individual assessment of the
> "truth" or whether
> the purpose of human logic is to develop a mode of thought that will
> resonate with - and therefore be reinforced by - by the rest
> of the clan,
> tribe, social grouping.
>
> Individuals may want the truth but so what? If we are
> social animals we
> have to ask what the clan wants and what the clan wants is
> not answers but
> common answers - a different thing entirely.
>
> Doesn't a logical social actor demand not only the "truth"
> as such but a
> "truth" that his clan will recognize as true?
>
>
> peace,
>
> boddi
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list