Re: SV: Only logic is necessary?

From: 1Z <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 07:16:52 -0700

Brent Meeker wrote:

> 1Z wrote:
> >
> > Brent Meeker wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You misunderstand "population models". It's not a question of what members of a species think or
> >>vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their survival in the evolutionary
> >>biological sense. So the majority can be wrong.
> >
> >
> > Cooper is making valid comments about *something*, but it isn't logic.
> > Logic is what tells us the majority can be wrong
> Cooper is not talking about logic in the formal sense; he's talking about reasoning, making
> decisions, acting. This can be "wrong" in the sense that there is a better (in terms of survival)
> way of reasoning.

If you want to judge what is better in terms of survival,
you need to use logic.

> I'm not sure that logic in the formal sense can be right or wrong; it's a set of conventions about
> language and inference. About the only standard I've seen by which a logic or mathematical system
> could be called "wrong" is it if it is inconsistent, i.e. the axioms and rules of inference allow
> everything to be a theorem.

And since logic isn't wrong by that standard, it is correct. Any
made about logic will be made with logic. There is no higher court of
appeal. (There are of course various fallacious forms
of informal reasoning, but they do not deserve to be called logic).

Logic ins't just correct --although it is -- it defines correctness. We
no other ultimate defintion. "Logic might be wrong" is incoherent.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Mon Jul 10 2006 - 10:17:54 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST