Humanists of the world gather up!

You probably meant to make the allusion, but just in case you were not: I really had to smile at how that argument mirrors the one employed by the most ardent and fundamentalist of religious believers.

In that case it's not doing a particularly good job at explaining...



Too bad you weren't around when we discussed that particular one in excruciating and Bregt-maddening detail.



A slightly awkward translation I've seen used would be "eventuality point of view".
I'd prefer "holistic approach" though, as that does seem to cover the content quite nicely.

Oh, I would like to do it for fun. Not neccessarily for usefulness or importance.
Those two sentences you quoted were not really related. I just notice that I am a rational person. And I would like to study logics out of personal interest.


If any subject should be part of any curriculum it should be ethics and everything that has to do with subjectivity, values and empathy, in other words share experiences and try to understand just a little bit of eachothers experiences and that would make a better place. Guess what, that would be my subject actually.


Seriously, I think logic can be important for instance to learn how to argument reasonably and to see flaws in scientific reseach and reasoning, but it's also very much based on language and western rational thinking, so...

I think we should be more careful with western rationality.

I agree completely with you Bregje, as well.

Is it Wilfrid Hodges' Logic? I bought that one! I was thinking of reading it this summer too.

Formal logic is crucial in any paradigm, of course, but really only as the base; the necessary point-of-departure. Thankfully, there are so many other aspects of human understanding and communication.

I taught a course in media rhetorics in 2007, and it was interesting to note that of the three appeal forms, 'pathos' and 'ethos' engaged the students FAR more than the 'logos'.

Yes, hence the NEED for the 'logos', to cut through the manipulation that is 'pathos' (especially in media!) and the flexible concept that is 'ethos'. In the best possible world the three should balance each other.
Experience though teaches us differently.

The fact that there are (of course!) more aspects to human communication and experience in my opinion in no way demeans the necessity of an understanding and grasp of logic!
To me it's as crucial as learning how to write!

So do you think there is a ruling principle?

Being, perhaps? Although that is too Buddhist for my liking, I guess. I don't know. That's why I would like to read more about it all and make up my mind then.

Speaking of Buddhism, I do like the idea that ratio is just one of the six senses. It's storage of thoughts. Thinking is less important than meditating and reflection. Makes me wonder how buddhists develop. Perhaps development belongs to ego, so they don't? Only development towards enlightment and not development in the 'western' sense of the word. All this ego vs. non-identity in buddhism confuses me very much. I do believe in identity and development of course!


Anyway, speaking of paradoxes, I thought this one was funny: The GreenLeft paradox (Dutch political party GroenLinks).

Check their logo.
The logo is both true and not true. On one hand it's not true because the word Green is not green and the word Left is not left. On the other hand is the word Green left en the word Left green and that's true.

Green is not green. Left is not left. Agree?

Now, green is left (green left). And left is green (green left). You see it?

Ho, I didn't discover that one myself!! I found it on the internet while looking for the Russell and Liar paradox and I laughed my ass of about it. Really good one isn't it!

^
MainTitles very own Ford Thaxton

Hell, no!

You work with classical physics. Have a look at quantum physics and prepare for your mind to be vehemently raped.

As I type, my mind is quivering in some corner of the quantum realm swaying back and forth wide-eyed in the fetal position. Srsly.