Dialectic Two-Step – Why Would Someone Disavow Logic?

Dialectic Two-Step  is an ongoing series of my thoughts on questions that come my way.

Wisdom lies neither in fixity nor in change, but in the dialectic between the two. - Octavio Paz  

Why Would Someone Choose to Disavow Logic?

Response:  Who, do you propose, is choosing to do such a thing. Logic applies to formal arguments and the relationship between ideas. It is set of rules that, when applied correctly, appear to preserve truth. It allows you to perform operations with language just like math applies to numbers.

These rules are considered valid if, amongst other things, they offer correct predictions. If Chloe has a tail, we have increased confidence that logic works.

To disavow logic, is to opt for chaos when using language. It follows that any predictions or conclusions would have no relationship to the premises. The conclusions/predictions would at best be accidentally correct. For instance, we may inspect Chloe and find a tail, but we would not be convinced that the argument used below to make the prediction had anything to do with it.

It’s unlikely that someone would/could choose “no logic”. What’s more likely is that people rely on false premises or invalid argument structures.

Here are some examples:

 

 

I think most people intuitively ascribe to logic.  They only apply the rules wrong or make false or ambiguous premises.

Get Each Week's Dialectic Two Step in your email box

First Name:

Last Name:

Email address:

In addition to a monthly email you can also subscribe to the following weekly series:
One Minute Meditations
Tiny Drops (Photography series)
Compass Songs (My Favorite Poems)
Dialectic Two-Step
Modern Koans (interesting questions)
Sunday Morning Coming Down (Music Videos)
Relics (Timeless Republished Articles)
Say What?
Quotes
Verse Us (Poems I Write)

 

The post Dialectic Two-Step – Why Would Someone Disavow Logic? appeared on Andrew Furst.