illogics

I don't really have anything to add, as I am not sure what the purposes of this thread is. However I can express this much: I effing hate logic. It's frusterating, irratating, and I largely am terrible at it. Logic can bite me.

I'll stick to intrinsics and assumptions thankyouverymuch.

Ok, obviously there us use to logic and I don't really hate it persay. It just is irratating to me becuase of the proof it requires for it to meet logics standards. I cut too many corners for it to work, and when I am asked to not cut those corners I no longer can get to those answers. My brain dislikes logic (along with language, which I see as related to this. I am not a pattern thinker).

 

That is an AEE2 categorical syllogism, which is a valid form.

When you say correct, you mean valid, right?

 

I coudn't live without logic.

It is like a set of polished perscription glasses without which I would be blind to the world.

Eh, think Flavus wanted to share something he just learned.

*Pats Flav*

 

Some people are superior, the rest are inferior.
Only inferior people disagree with that statement.

(It's like: Some people always say the truth, the rest always lie. Only those, who always lie, claim that the first statement is false.)

The worst part is that it's not logically incorrect, it just has no way to be disproven (or truly verified!) within the same order of logic.

p.s. the superior/inferior dichotomy could be replaced with anything like moral/immoral, pretty/ugly, smart/stupid etc.

 

Yes, you cannot arrive at truth via logic. You can only arrive at validity or invalidity.

 

Logic is the only thing that makes any sense to me. Even my feelings and assumptions are evaluated and categorized using logic.

 

Some men are pussies. Some men are dicks. Therefore, all men are walking genitalia.

 

I'm the complete opposite. Throwing around unverified assumptions makes me go craaazzy. :censored: :frusty:

 

Logic....
.....

even when something is valid / invalid, sometimes it doesn't make it any less true / untrue. -A-

so I guess I understand logic, but abhor those who used it without any consideration of the.....random things (or their own judgement) tilting their perfectly orderly logic train.

But I guess I might be wrong here. Dunno. >_>; I seek truth rather than logical.. validity. If by reaching the truth I must have validity, than so be it.

 

Wouldn't both Flavus and Indigo arrive at the same conclusion to FA's logic statement traveling down different paths?


Maybe it's that yin-yang - dualistic nature of humans to have both abilities within us to do our critical thinking?

 

“Any true intellectual would recognize the necessity for studying logical fallacies.”

Argumentum ad Populum - lit. argument to the people. Statement which is designed to appeal popular sentiment rather than carefully constructed reason. Materially illogical.

 

Equivocation.

 

The conclusion doesn't sound right unless it is re-written as below:

All pussies are cats;
Some bears are pussies,
Therefore some bears are cats.

:violin: