Advantage of Logic due to Abstraction
Posted: Thu Feb 15, 2024 5:36 am
In the thread below;
Belief in Abstract Objects is Irrational?
viewtopic.php?t=41775
I argued, belief in abstract objects [from a pragmatic view] is not irrational in countering PH's dogmatic view.
PH's view is that to believe in abstract object is irrational, but that is based on the realists' version of the shallow dichotomy between concrete objects vs abstract objects which is useful merely in some ways but not with reference to a more nuanced and higher level of reality.
Here is a more refined level of consideration re abstract objects;
In abstracting logic only deal with the Form, i.e. the abstract-object and not the substance [whether it exists as real is contentious].
Now
Thus, those [e.g. PH and others] who insist abstract objects are irrational from the crude point of view are implying scientific facts grounded on abstract objects are irrational?
This is because their thinking is narrow, shallow and dogmatic.
Discuss??
Views??
Belief in Abstract Objects is Irrational?
viewtopic.php?t=41775
I argued, belief in abstract objects [from a pragmatic view] is not irrational in countering PH's dogmatic view.
PH's view is that to believe in abstract object is irrational, but that is based on the realists' version of the shallow dichotomy between concrete objects vs abstract objects which is useful merely in some ways but not with reference to a more nuanced and higher level of reality.
Here is a more refined level of consideration re abstract objects;
Logic [one of the best tool we have] in terms of knowledge [a priori or empirical] is grounded on abstract object.The sphere of Logic is quite precisely delimited; its sole concern is to give an exhaustive exposition and a strict proof of the Formal Rules of all Thought, whether it be a priori or Empirical, whatever be its Origin or its Object, and whatever hindrances, accidental or natural, it may encounter in our Minds.
That Logic should have been thus successful is an advantage which it owes entirely to its Limitations, whereby it is justified in abstracting indeed, it is under obligation to do so from all Objects of Knowledge and their differences, leaving the Understanding [Intellect] nothing to deal with save itself and its Form.
Kant CPR Bix
In abstracting logic only deal with the Form, i.e. the abstract-object and not the substance [whether it exists as real is contentious].
Now
- Logic is grounded on abstraction to generate abstract object.
Science is grounded on logic, i.e. inductive logic.
At present, science is most rational, credible and objective knowledge.
Therefore, the idea of abstract objects is rational.
Thus, those [e.g. PH and others] who insist abstract objects are irrational from the crude point of view are implying scientific facts grounded on abstract objects are irrational?
This is because their thinking is narrow, shallow and dogmatic.
Discuss??
Views??