Re: SV: Only logic is necessary?

From: John M <>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:10:53 -0700 (PDT)

--- 1Z <> wrote:>
> Brent Meeker wrote:
(Skip to 1Z's reply)
> If you want to judge what is better in terms of
> survival,
> you need to use logic.
And then you may be still wrong, things sometimes
occur (in our terms - see below) as "illogical" or
even: "counterproductive". Human logic is based on the
'part' of nature (in broadest terms) we so far
discovered. Even only the reductionist representation
of such.
Further epistemic enrichment may change our views (our
logic included).

> > 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
> >allow everything to be a theorem.

"Inconsistent" towards "language and inference" and
more, all on a certain evolutionary level of human
development - as we know AND acknowledge it. In
devising future advancement in thinking I would go a
bit further than what "I've seen".

> And since logic isn't wrong by that standard, it is
> correct. Any judgement
> 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).
Wise inter-remark: "by that standard". You are
entitled to your opinion to call 'logic' whatever you
define.. The 'Any judgement' is valid even towards
yours. Including what you deem as "deserve" to be
called. - What reminds me of the ongoing stupid
debates about the so called "(gay) marriage" - a
'name' with ONE ancient definition,causing endless
problems, while another 'name' or definition would
eliminate the controversy.
> Logic ins't just correct --although it is -- it
> defines correctness. We have
> no other ultimate defintion. "Logic might be wrong"
> is incoherent.
Withuin (BY?) our human logic we define 'correctness'
as consistent within (by?) itself. Closing our minds
to anything different.


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 - 12:11:55 PDT

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