Any science of logic?

What is the basis for reason? And mathematics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 596
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Any science of logic?

Post by RCSaunders » Fri May 31, 2019 7:01 pm

Univalence wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 5:42 pm
RCSaunders wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 5:01 pm
Sure! When you answer the question, "what is quantum physics," without any interpretation.
I am afraid you are going to have to lead the way here. I already admitted to being unable to answer "What is X" questions in any meaningful way.
Best I can do is ostensive definitions and I don't have one for "quantum physics".
You are unable to answer "What is X?"
But then you write:
Univalence wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 5:42 pm
In my field of work we have a mantra: If you ask a stupid question - you will get a stupid answer. "What is X?" is what I call a stupid question. X is Y. What is Y? Y is Z. On and on. Such answers contain no new information.

I call it "The ontological error of Philosophy". I posted about it here.
But you do know what X is if it is, "field," or, "work," or, "mantra," or "question," or "philosophy," or, "ontology."
Univalence wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 5:42 pm
I even proposed a litmus test. Describe what things ARE without telling us what they DO. e.g don't use any verbs in your description.
Any existent is all its attributes, relationships, and behavior, known or unknown. Before the behavior of anything can be identified, the thing must be identified, and the behavior of all things is determined by their own nature in a specific context. Place a pool ball on a table and strike it with the cue ball. How the pool ball will move will be determined, it is supposed, by the angle and energy of the cue ball and the surface of the pool table. Now replace the pool ball with an egg. Assume the cue ball angle and energy are the same, the behavior of the egg is different because its nature is different from a pool ball. (This also illustrates what is wrong with the whole view of cause as taught and believed today.)
Univalence wrote:
Fri May 31, 2019 5:42 pm
quote=RCSaunders post_id=411291 time=1559318480 user_id=16196]
Because I am going to assume your question is an honest one, here are two links. One is an introduction of epistemology that briefly describes what knowledge is, the second is a more detailed explanation of basic epistemology.

Both articles are mine.
No, I know what epistemology does. I don't know what knowledge is. What you write about doesn't strike me as "epistemology".
[/quote]
I suspect you did not really read the articles. I read very fast with excellent recall, but could not have read both articles and commented that quickly. You may be faster than me.

I certainly described what knowledge is, and how it's acquired. I quote, "All knowledge consists of propositions that assert something correct about some aspect of reality. By the time one is an adult one has stored millions of propositions, many explicitly and many more implicitly or derived from other propositions. All these propositions make up all our basic views of life, of reality, and our values—in other words, all that we believe and guide our lives by." It is all our views of life, of reality, and our values, including everything we understand and identify that is our knowledge. Most people's views and beliefs include a great deal the is not true, and therefore not knowledge but superstition and credulity, but everything one can identify and understand that is true is knowledge, from knowing heavier than air flight is possible to the names of all their children.

I'm not sure what would strike you as epistemology. Perhaps you expect it to be some esoteric thing that views "truth" as some metaphysical thing.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest