Newbie
Newbie
Hi folks, I'm a middle-aged geek with a background in engineering and an interest in philosophy (or, as I like to call it - concept engineering )
To be honest, I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with philosophy, much of it strikes me absurd - nothing more than "words about words", and I get particularly impatient with those who seek to impress under cover of a maze of obscurity. For me, philosophy should be about clarity of thought, and I'm particularly interested in Logic. I note that there isn't a separate section on logic here - would it be possible to add one? failing that, I assume any posts on the topic should go in the Epistemology section?
To be honest, I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with philosophy, much of it strikes me absurd - nothing more than "words about words", and I get particularly impatient with those who seek to impress under cover of a maze of obscurity. For me, philosophy should be about clarity of thought, and I'm particularly interested in Logic. I note that there isn't a separate section on logic here - would it be possible to add one? failing that, I assume any posts on the topic should go in the Epistemology section?
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Newbie
Welcome seditionist
Re: Logic
I agree there should be such a category and you're right Epistemology looks to be the place for such topics. Two agreements! Good start.
Re: Logic
I agree there should be such a category and you're right Epistemology looks to be the place for such topics. Two agreements! Good start.
-
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:55 am
- Contact:
Re: Newbie
If a new section is to be created, it might be appropriate to call it "Logic and philosophy of mathematics".
Re: Newbie
seditionist eh? I had to look it up. I just like the name, but apparently one of my ancestors did end up with his head on a pole for being involved in the assassination plot of 1696. Not that I'm a history buff, but my granny wrote a book about it.Arising_uk wrote:Welcome seditionist
I suppose philosophy of mathematics would go with logic, but isn't maths a science? there's already a section for philosophy of science.
Who has the power to make these decision? I definitely think there should be a separate section; how can there be a section on philosophy of gender but not one on a cornerstone of philosophy?
Re: Newbie
Whilst I'm not necessarily saying there shouldn't be a separate section for logic you'll probably find that logic turns up in a great many debates around here on many different topics. Granted, that's usually on specific applications of logic though.
And welcome to the forums.
And welcome to the forums.
- JohniJones
- Posts: 47
- Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:41 pm
- Location: cardiff wales
- Contact:
Re: Newbie
I can talk logic, fool. Stop complaining.Jacobite wrote:Hi folks, I'm a middle-aged geek with a background in engineering and an interest in philosophy (or, as I like to call it - concept engineering )
To be honest, I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with philosophy, much of it strikes me absurd - nothing more than "words about words", and I get particularly impatient with those who seek to impress under cover of a maze of obscurity. For me, philosophy should be about clarity of thought, and I'm particularly interested in Logic. I note that there isn't a separate section on logic here - would it be possible to add one? failing that, I assume any posts on the topic should go in the Epistemology section?
-
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Newbie
Welcome to the Forum.Jacobite wrote:Hi folks, I'm a middle-aged geek with a background in engineering and an interest in philosophy (or, as I like to call it - concept engineering )
To be honest, I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with philosophy, much of it strikes me absurd - nothing more than "words about words", and I get particularly impatient with those who seek to impress under cover of a maze of obscurity. For me, philosophy should be about clarity of thought, and I'm particularly interested in Logic. I note that there isn't a separate section on logic here - would it be possible to add one? failing that, I assume any posts on the topic should go in the Epistemology section?
Please ignore John Jones; his girlfriend Dolly packed up her spare fleece, stood up on her four legs and walked right out the door vowing never to return.
He'll be better when he visits the flock again.
Re: Newbie
Hi Jacobite,
Welcome.
Me too.
I love the idea of a Logical section.
Mmmmm...
No proselytizing.
No moralizing.
No politics.
No word games.
No rhetoric.
No axe grinding.
The aim being to try to exchange the what and why of logical ideas.
Just up front, rational thought.
(I'm not too keen on all the squiggles though.)
It'll never work.
But, what if it could?
It might need a doorman.
If you're not made of nand gates, you're not coming in.
A logical section, my dreams come true.
Shame it all ends in the ultimate nightmare.
_________________
Live long and prosper.
Welcome.
Me too.
I love the idea of a Logical section.
Mmmmm...
No proselytizing.
No moralizing.
No politics.
No word games.
No rhetoric.
No axe grinding.
The aim being to try to exchange the what and why of logical ideas.
Just up front, rational thought.
(I'm not too keen on all the squiggles though.)
It'll never work.
But, what if it could?
It might need a doorman.
If you're not made of nand gates, you're not coming in.
A logical section, my dreams come true.
Shame it all ends in the ultimate nightmare.
_________________
Live long and prosper.
-
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:22 pm
- Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Newbie
How many logics do you believe there are?Metazoan wrote:Hi Jacobite,
Welcome.
Me too.
I love the idea of a Logical section.
Mmmmm...
No proselytizing.
No moralizing.
No politics.
No word games.
No rhetoric.
No axe grinding.
The aim being to try to exchange the what and why of logical ideas.
Just up front, rational thought.
(I'm not too keen on all the squiggles though.)
It'll never work.
But, what if it could?
It might need a doorman.
If you're not made of nand gates, you're not coming in.
A logical section, my dreams come true.
Shame it all ends in the ultimate nightmare.
_________________
Live long and prosper.
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Newbie
I can think of four at least Ron. How many do you think there are?
-
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 1:22 pm
- Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Contact:
Re: Newbie
I think it depends on how you define it. In the broadest sense, there are as many as there are people or even creatures, all having their own trusts, expectations, presumptions, predictions, beliefs and intentions.Arising_uk wrote:I can think of four at least Ron. How many do you think there are?
Re: Newbie
ROFLMAO!
_________________
I hate ironing.
_________________
I hate ironing.
Re: Newbie
Hi folks,
Sorry about that, I'm all better now.
Hi Ron,
I wasn't laughing at you or Arising, I just had to laugh.
Like asking how many colours do I believe there are in a rainbow.
The question seems to me to be so ambiguous that it is either a trap or a lead in to a slightly more complex version of the game 'when does bread become toast?'.
To me, logic just is. It cares nothing for names, games and arithmetic.
I hold a clear distinction between logic and the language used to describe it.
1 + 2 = 3
is identical to
1 + 10 = 11
is identical to
...
(3 dots, not an ellipsis)
I think there is a danger in being too keen to develop languages to describe concepts as it is all too easy to lose sight of what it is that the language is actually describing.
You can then end up following arcane rules and miss the fact that the above three examples are identical.
That is not to say that the rules aren't immensely useful, I wouldn't be without them.
My point is: it is the purpose that is important.
Match the tools to the purpose, not the other way around; be master, not slave.
So my immediate question to myself was why did you ask what you did? What is your purpose?
For sure, you weren't looking for an answer.
Can you say why you asked the question the way you did and also enumerate the purpose or objective?
_________________
I'll ask my toaster.
Sorry about that, I'm all better now.
Hi Ron,
I wasn't laughing at you or Arising, I just had to laugh.
This strikes me as a very odd question.You wrote:How many logics do you believe there are?
Like asking how many colours do I believe there are in a rainbow.
The question seems to me to be so ambiguous that it is either a trap or a lead in to a slightly more complex version of the game 'when does bread become toast?'.
To me, logic just is. It cares nothing for names, games and arithmetic.
I hold a clear distinction between logic and the language used to describe it.
1 + 2 = 3
is identical to
1 + 10 = 11
is identical to
...
(3 dots, not an ellipsis)
I think there is a danger in being too keen to develop languages to describe concepts as it is all too easy to lose sight of what it is that the language is actually describing.
You can then end up following arcane rules and miss the fact that the above three examples are identical.
That is not to say that the rules aren't immensely useful, I wouldn't be without them.
My point is: it is the purpose that is important.
Match the tools to the purpose, not the other way around; be master, not slave.
So my immediate question to myself was why did you ask what you did? What is your purpose?
For sure, you weren't looking for an answer.
Can you say why you asked the question the way you did and also enumerate the purpose or objective?
_________________
I'll ask my toaster.
- Arising_uk
- Posts: 12314
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am
Re: Newbie
I was just thinking philosophical logic - Propositional, Predicate, Modal, Deontic, Epistemic, so five I can think of so far.
Re: Newbie
Where does Boolean algebra fit in? (Ithink it's beautiful, in a clunky sort of way.)Arising_uk wrote:I was just thinking philosophical logic - Propositional, Predicate, Modal, Deontic, Epistemic, so five I can think of so far.