Position:Home>Philosophy> Logical Flaw in using logic?

Yes!.!.!. that is only one reason why logic is uncertain!. You are using the whole existential view-point, like Rene Descartes!? But there are others reasons why logic is uncertain!.

Another reason why logic is uncertain is that logic is a human construct!. We made the rules and we refuse to allow deviation from them to still be valid!. Logic is very subjective!.!.!. why do you think we still have so many controversial social issues that have yet to be resolved!? Logic and reason simply do not work!.

Logic is also different on different levels of existence and from different perspectives!. Logic on the quantum level is fundamentally different!. It applies to that level!. At what point do the rules of logic go from the quantum to the Newtonian!? From the relativistic to the Newtonian!? Logic is not constant or universal!.!.!. and our Newtonian logic isnt necessarily the most right!.

Furthermore, if you believe in a deity, and why logic can never be used to disprove God, is that God created logic along with physics and everything else!.!.!. and is therefore a construct of Gods imagination!.

What good does our highly subjective, possibly God-invented, possibly man-invented, non-universal Newtonian human-perspective on logic!.!.!. what good is it for discovering universal, spiritual, abstract truths!? We cant even use logic to figure out how to travel at faster-than-light speeds!.!.!. we cant even resolve our global-warming or abortion or capital-punishment issues!. Good luck figuring out things more abstract!.!.!. good luck using logic to reason truths that exist in far-distant corners of the universe or even outside of it or souls and spiritualism and other non-measurable entities

Logicians will tell you that deduction supersedes induction and both supersede intuitive and emotional rhetoric!. They say, as an intelligent human being capable of deduction, it is our responsibility to use it!. But really, there are some things we simply cannot reason with deductive or inductive logic!. Sometimes emotional rhetoric is all we have!. As a human being, we are also subject to our emotions!.!.!. our feelings do matter to our lives!. And so is it so wrong to appeal to emotion to make decisions about life!? Should emotion never supersede deduction to reason out our worlds policies!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

I would not go so far as to say that logic cannot prove anything!. Even if, what we perceive is totally false-logical conclusions would still be correct based on those preceptions!.

Logic is simply a tool for thinking!. It was proved long ago (by logic itself ironically) that logic has its limitations!. It cannot prove, explain, etc!.!. everything in and of the Universe!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Well when your born you do see upside down, yet we learn to see in a way that is much more useful for us!. Now that doesnt mean all logical conclusions have been inherited but it also doesnt mean it was!. It depends how you see it and what you beilive!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

You asserted, "There is no way to tell what we perceive is what is actually is happening!."

In that case could you lend me $1,000!?

Or do you want to reconsider your assertion!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Then what follows is!.!.!.!? The point is this: If we are inherently bound by our perceptions, and if we cannot prove them as right or wrong, then this very thesis of yours cannot be proved to be right or wrong (and by that I mean true or false)!. But, if what you say is neither true nor false (or, at least cannot be shown to be true or false) then you haven't really informed us of anything; you haven't shown us that what you said is actually the case!. Thus, none of us on here have been given any reasons to accept what you said, in fact, you cannot give us reasons as to why we ought to accept your idea; for reasons are claims which are either true or false and that purport to justify a conclusion!. Without them you have no argument!. Further, I think you are also assuming there is something else than reality that we may be perceiving!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Actually, the problem you mention, a kind of Cartesian skepticism about what we sense, doesn't really have much to do with logic!. Logic remains certain, even if we are not certain about the world!. I may not be sure if Socrates is a man, but the argument Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal is still a valid argument!.

I see an analogy of your question being: We are inherently bound by our perceptions!. We can not be certain that there are two groups of two apples on the table!. Since we cannot be certain about that, we cannot be certain that those two groups of apples combined will result in a grup of four apples!. So there is a flaw in mathematics, and math cannot prove anything!.

I hope this examples helps to see why it is a little silly to blame math and logic, which do convey certainty (we know that 2+2=4, even if we aren't sure how many apples are on the table; we know modus ponens is a valid tool of logic, even if we are not sure about empirical premises we are applying it to) for uncertainty in perception!. This is why when philosophers use loigc, they are careful to point out that any starting empirical premises are assumptions, and the logic serves as a tool to show what logically follows IF you hold those assumptions!.

In so far as logic requires assumed premises about the world in order to be useful, we can not be sure of the certainty of the conclusion!. But this isn't a flaw of logic, it is a flaw in whatever it is we use to arrive at the initial premises!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---