Is Logic Universal?

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85182 wrote:

How is it, and I think we should all delve very closely into this factor, that upon addressing this question of logic and its congruence with free will, that none of you spoke one word about wisdom in any of your posts.

Is it because logic has nothing to do with wisdom?
In biblical times someone who was able to think somewhat logical might have been considered wise.
Might be that the guy you mentioned had access to the principles of logic taught in one or another culture.
So he had an education that elevated him compared to other kings.
Any kind of knowledge (education) that was not common made a person wiser than others.
Also having knowledge about the astrology of other cultures could make a person wise.
Nowadays however we don't regard it as wise when someone simply is highly educated.
I talked to people who are experts in logic but behave so poorly in terms of communicating with others that obviously wisdom is far out of reach for them.
Maybe your thread should have been named 'what has logic to do with wisdom?'

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;85189 wrote:

Is it because logic has nothing to do with wisdom?
In biblical times someone who was able to think somewhat logical might have been considered wise.
Might be that the guy you mentioned had access to the principles of logic taught in one or another culture.
So he had an education that elevated him compared to other kings.
Any kind of knowledge (education) that was not common made a person wiser than others.
Also having knowledge about the astrology of other cultures could make a person wise.
Nowadays however we don't regard it as wise when someone simply is highly educated.
I talked to people who are experts in logic but behave so poorly in terms of communicating with others that obviously wisdom is far out of reach for them.
Maybe your thread should have been named 'what has logic to do with wisdom?'

So you do not see a need for a person to be wise in order to deduce the logic from a teaching or a discovery?

Can one be wise without being educated?

Can one be logical without being wise?

@Pathfinder,

i think wisdom is a learned skill-the kind that cant be taught, but only learned through experience, and many people never become wise.

logic can be used, deduced and understood and communicated by people who are not necessarily wise. it can be taught as a method.

and education, if you are referring to book-learning and school quiz type of thing, is not a requisite for either of the above.

i think a wise person can recognize the value in a teaching or discovery as it applies to use without his knowing formal logic or having any education.

@Pathfinder,

It seems to me that without applying logic one cannot attain wisdom, and yet without wisdom one cannot apply logic.

What does that say to the ability to acquire either?

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85212 wrote:

It seems to me that without applying logic one cannot attain wisdom, and yet without wisdom one cannot apply logic.

What does that say to the ability to acquire either?

i think it might say that you are wrong! Laughing

seriously, i may not be understanding your definition of logic and wisdom. can you define them and explain why you believe what you said in the quote above? there is another thing called knowledge-and i also believe that can be attained without logic, education or wisdom. but it may remain nothing more than a library in the mind-of no practical use to the person who has it if he has no sense of logic or wisdom to know how to use it.

@Pathfinder,

The basis of logic is to distinguish correct from incorrect reasoning in which wisdom is a result of or a generator. A criteria of search for justification of a fundamental belief may be universally utilized, but the results are not always satisfying. Thus logic cannot be universally applicable,for the criteria used may not hold legitimate reasons for a plausible conclusion.

Most often discernment comes naturalistic, one does not necessarily need the 'education' to fulfill wisdom. If the truth itself cannot be justified, the 'education' may not be logistically justifiable. It is difficult to know what to believe if you don't know if the education you are receiving is reasonable. I'm not sure if wisdom can be applied without a bit of logic used for the formation of the conclusion. It's crucial to understand how and why that conclusion reached for it to be recognized as 'wisdom.'

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;84880 wrote:

does logic actually play any part in actually acquiring knowledge, or can any mind define knowledge and logic by any definition they so choose because they are creating reality in just surmising the possibilities?

Wouldn't we need to look at this cross-culturally to find the answer?

I believe there is a lot in common between people throughout the world in terms of their capacity for abstract thought. But one can't be sure that mutually incompatible logical schemes aren't held by different cultures, and if so, how can there be any measure as to the "right" one?

@Pathfinder,

Wisdom is acquired by applying logic in such a way that it gains knowledge that directly enhances the character of the person.

In any given situation there is always only one route that will take a person to a particular experience, and that particular experience will always have one specific reward for that person.

When wisdom is the reward of an experience, it could only have been acquired through the application of logic to reach that goal. Without that application the reward of wisdom could not have been attained.

Knowledge can be categorized. Wisdom cannot.

Wisdom can be defined as logically acquired knowledge that in some way enhances the character of a man.

@Aedes,

Aedes;85239 wrote:

Wouldn't we need to look at this cross-culturally to find the answer?

I believe there is a lot in common between people throughout the world in terms of their capacity for abstract thought. But one can't be sure that mutually incompatible logical schemes aren't held by different cultures, and if so, how can there be any measure as to the "right" one?

http://anthropology.uwaterloo.ca/courses/Anth311/AZANDE~1.HTM

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;85246 wrote:

http://anthropology.uwaterloo.ca/courses/Anth311/AZANDE~1.HTM

That's not a cross-cultural study. That's an isolated study of a single system. Their logical schema may actually rest on a frame of logic that resembles that of other unrelated groups. Or it may not. You need to ask the same questions the same way of different groups.

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85212 wrote:

It seems to me that without applying logic one cannot attain wisdom, and yet without wisdom one cannot apply logic.

What does that say to the ability to acquire either?

This is most certainly the case, assuming you agree with this definition of wisdom: The ability to consult past experience in order to recognize common themes and apply them to a present situation for a better outcome. Wisdom is one's ability to be broadly rational: You take into account more contingencies and consult more chains of reasoning, seeing more clearly how they end. There are situations where wisdom is needed and situations where logic and a set of axioms suffices. Wisdom can help you choose the axioms around which you make a rational decision; when you say 'well if I do X, then Y will certainly happen' due to past experience, you are using some degree of wisdom. The better you are at sorting out what the consequences of your actions will be (in a social setting), the wiser you are.

One gets better at the discipline of applying logic with experience to be sure, some have more innate ability than others but wisdom is built up by experience. Assuming one faces his or her experiences in an honest way, one should probably expect some gains in the way of his or her ability to reason.

My view of what 'wisdom' refers to has been built up by my experience with the board game 'Go'(or baduk, or weiqi). When you start out, there are so many possibilities you cannot pick where to play, but over time as you gain experience, you begin to see where it is important to place your stones(the pieces used are black and white stones). As you play more, you begin to be able to recognize patterns of play and you can simply look at an area of the board and see how your opponent will react to various plays you could make. You gain the ability to see multiple chains of reasoning through to their ends, you can predict the result many moves ahead. Go is a better example than chess because it has proven fairly impervious to data trees, computer programs are generally pretty poor Go players(the best ones are based on probability engines that consult actual games in order to 'chose' a move).

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85245 wrote:

Wisdom is acquired by applying logic in such a way that it gains knowledge that directly enhances the character of the person.

In any given situation there is always only one route that will take a person to a particular experience, and that particular experience will always have one specific reward for that person.

When wisdom is the reward of an experience, it could only have been acquired through the application of logic to reach that goal. Without that application the reward of wisdom could not have been attained.

Knowledge can be categorized. Wisdom cannot.

Wisdom can be defined as logically acquired knowledge that in some way enhances the character of a man.

There is also a difference to be taken into account regarding the devious tenacity of those who gain experience through numerous efforts to gain advantage or superiority in some way over others. The fact that great warriors can become knowledgeable and skilled in thwarting their enemies should not be counted as wisdom. Cunning maybe. Many predators are cunning and skilled, but this does not make them wise.

Wisdom is directly related to character in my book of life.

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;84880 wrote:

When considering the reasoning behind an assumption we would all like to believe that we have applied a logic based foundation to our conclusions.

My question takes into account that what may seem logical to some is not logic to others.

In the philosophy where we create what we think, and in the environment where energy alone is the only source of reality, and where consciousness does not exist and is illusionary,

I keep reading the words but I can not understand where that is, do you mean a void, Without consciousness there is only void.

Quote:

does logic actually play any part in actually acquiring knowledge,

These are good definitions of logic.

http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/logic/frege.gif

To discover truths is the task of all sciences; it falls to logic to discern the laws of truth. ... I assign to logic the task of discovering the laws of truth, not of assertion or thought." - Gottlob Frege (1848-1925) From his 1956 paper "The Thought : A Logical Inquiry" in Mind Vol. 65.

http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/logic/tarski.gif

"logic" ... [is] ... the name of a discipline which analyzes the meaning of the concepts common to all the sciences, and establishes the general laws governing the concepts. - Alfred Tarski (1901-1983)
From his Introduction to logic and to the methodology of deductive sciences, Dover, page xi.

I think you are attributing too much mass to logic. Logic is rationalization, the round ones to one side the square ones to the other. Logic is the regurgertation of input information relevant to the subject, and when coupled with extrapolations of enviromental imperatives, we make decisions based on perceived outcomes.
Perhaps you are meaning the intelectual capacity to rationalize when you say "logical to some is not logical to others". The ability to apply logic comes with intellectual capacity, the less capacity the poorer rationalization/logic you can employ. Logic is a decription of a process that employs many parts of our brain in combination, there is no logical portion of the brain, logic does not exist without input.

Quote:

or can any mind define knowledge and logic by any definition they so choose because they are creating reality in just surmising the possibilities.

Reality to the individual can be anything they can convince themselves of. It is the coming into contact with other peoples realities that tears physical holes in theirs.

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85212 wrote:

It seems to me that without applying logic one cannot attain wisdom, and yet without wisdom one cannot apply logic.

What does that say to the ability to acquire either?

Sorry but this sounds neither wise nor logical to me.

Are you aware that computers are able to make decisions based on complex logical operations?
In other words they make logical decisions ?
So far i haven't really seen to much wisdom in a computers behaviour.

It depends however on how you define wisdom.

I think Salima already asked for that.

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;85290 wrote:

Sorry but this sounds neither wise nor logical to me.

Are you aware that computers are able to make decisions based on complex logical operations?
In other words they make logical decisions ?
So far i haven't really seen to much wisdom in a computers behaviour.

It depends however on how you define wisdom.

I think Salima already asked for that.

My God man, are you aware that a computer is nothing more than a preinstalled program of mathematical calculations? There is no such thing as a computer that makes decisions. They can only do what their programmer has installed into them as software by using whatever hardware they have. A computer may be able to choose between two options if it is programmed with more than one option, and will do so by using the programming that tells it what tp base the different choice of options on.

For instamnce a thermostat can be programmed to light the fire when its sensors read a temp below a predesignated point or to avoid lighting the fire if the temp reads above a certain point.

Is that the computer making a decision? I dont think so!

As I said, what sounds logical to some is certainly not logical to others. the question remains has this view of computer technology created a reality within the universe that Exebeche creates?

Is Exebeche creating an existence where computers actually do make decisions because that is what he believes?

@Pathfinder,

Pathfinder;85317 wrote:

My God man, are you aware that a computer is nothing more than a preinstalled program of mathematical calculations? There is no such thing as a computer that makes decisions. They can only do what their programmer has installed into them as software by using whatever hardware they have. A computer may be able to choose between two options if it is programmed with more than one option, and will do so by using the programming that tells it what tp base the different choice of options on.

If a computer doesn't make decisions, tell me how it can win a chess game.

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;85318 wrote:

If a computer doesn't make decisions, tell me how it can win a chess game.

I am pretty certain that what I have to tell you will not matter to you. Why don't you really try to answer that for yourself my friend?

@Exebeche,

Exebeche;85290 wrote:

Are you aware that computers are able to make decisions based on complex logical operations?
In other words they make logical decisions ?

Is following a logical algorhithm the same as making a logical decision?

@Aedes,

Aedes;85368 wrote:

Is following a logical algorhithm the same as making a logical decision?

Depends what you mean by 'follow'.
If you have to make a choice between several options i would say yes.
That's what a chess computer does.

---------- Post added 08-24-2009 at 06:08 PM ----------

Pathfinder;85327 wrote:

Why don't you really try to answer that for yourself my friend?

I'm not sure if i'm your friend. I would first like to get to know you better.

@Pathfinder,

If by logic, we mean deductive reasoning, I would argue it must be universal.

I think there are some concepts in this universe that are unchanging and dependable, for example the law of contradiction. You can not be dead and alive at the same time, a phone can not be broken and working at the same time etc.

As for computers, they are merely identifying variables, and then applying pre-determined logical rules to the variables. They maybe logical in their function, but not in their result, as that will depend on the rules, and as others may testify, sometimes the chess computer plays a weird move. I doubt thats because the laws of logic are not universal, but merely because the sequence of rules that the computer has followed were not applicable for that situation.

Very interesting discussion though,

many thanks.

Philosophy Forum

Is Logic Universal?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know