How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Is logic useful?   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Is logic useful?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


25 posted 04-25-2007 07:03 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Drauntz.  I still don't see how logic leads to the new brick.  Isn't the mortar applied post facto?

"Neptune.....Discovered on September 23, 1846, Neptune is notable for being the first planet discovered based on mathematical prediction rather than regular observations...Wikipedia"

OK, but this too from the Wiki:

"Neptune was discovered as the result of observed irregularities in the motion of Uranus and was the first planet to be discovered on the basis of theoretical calculations."

Wasn't the important event that someone, actually several people, intuited that mathematical calculations could be used to predict the presence of something previously unseen?  Again, isn't the rest post facto -- mathematical logic used after insight to verify the validity of the insight?

More Wiki, because it gets curiouser and curiouser.  

"J. C. Adams of Britain and U. J. Leverrier of France independently predicted the position of Neptune, and it was discovered by J. C. Galle in 1846, the day after he received Leverrier's prediction."

Not only does that darned syncronicity show up again but, as the above sentence is phrased, it calls into question the etymological use in this case, of the word "prediction."

And there's that darned language thing again.

Thank you for taking the time to provide  serious responses.  I truly appreciate your thought, and try to respond appropriately.

Best, Jim


Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


26 posted 04-25-2007 08:26 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

Hmm, someone likes Wikipedia...




(Caution: Post hopping in progress)

Edele... That's a new one. I must admit, I like Edster better. Mostly because it sounds like Teamster and since your name is Jim and Jimmy Hoffa was the leader of the Teamsters, I thought it'd be an appropriate moniker for you to give me.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


27 posted 04-25-2007 09:50 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Again, isn't the rest post facto -- mathematical logic used after insight to verify the validity of the insight?

Define insight for us, Jim? Preferably without throwing cause and effect out the window?

Seems to me that logic isn't necessarily confined to what we can easily articulate. Logic is simply what the human brain does while we're looking. I think insight and intuition are examples of the same thing . . . except it typically happens when we're NOT looking.


Kitherion
Member
since 08-01-2006
Posts 179
Johannesburg


28 posted 04-26-2007 01:09 AM       View Profile for Kitherion   Email Kitherion   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Kitherion

What the hell is up with wikipedia????????????????????????????????????

Does everyone not know tht it is subjective to media veiwing???????????????????/?????????/????

"Our Father who art in Heaven... Hallowed be thy name..."

Drauntz
Member Elite
since 03-16-2007
Posts 2907
Los Angeles California


29 posted 04-26-2007 01:14 AM       View Profile for Drauntz   Email Drauntz   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Drauntz

It is fun to talk about this topic.

oceanvu2,

how about boiling kettle led to locomotive
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


30 posted 04-26-2007 01:41 AM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Brad!   How about "Insight is a specific experiential event engendering the shock(the effect)which occurs when neural synapses connect in a way they haven't connected before(the cause).

Logic is a process.  Insight is an event.

When child notices, outside the context of logic, that he or she is not the same thing as the grass, that's an insight, an experienced event.  When an adult notices, outside the context of logic, that he or she IS the same thing as the grass (tat tvam asi)that's an insight, an experienced  event.

Happily twisting your words, adding my own and distorting your meaning, I mangle your quote:

"Seems to me that logic is what we can articulate after the experience. Logic is what the human brain does while we're looking. I think insight and intuition are can ONLY happen when we're NOT looking."

Here's an insight that just snapped my head up:  I'm pontificating!  I never thought before that that was going to happen, not to The Grand Equivocator!

Blessings on thee, then, my children, and at least I gave it a shot.

Best, Jim-Paul the First.

oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


31 posted 04-26-2007 01:45 AM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Drauntz. re "how about boiling kettle led to locomotive"  Yup, I like that one a lot better.  It's very logical!

Hi Kith!  Huh?

Jim  
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


32 posted 04-26-2007 01:13 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Hi Brad! How about "Insight is a specific experiential event engendering the shock(the effect)which occurs when neural synapses connect in a way they haven't connected before(the cause).

Logic is a process. Insight is an event.

Jim, Brad is the smart one. I'm the cute one. I can certainly understand your confusion, though. Sometimes, I think even Brad forgets which is which.  

So, am I to understand then that you contend that events don't have antecedents? I sort of always thought that processes lead to events, and that it's often a bit subjective where one separates the two?


oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


33 posted 04-26-2007 02:03 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi Ron!  Sorry for the confusion.  When I watch mythbusters, I can never remember Jamie or Adam wears the beanie...

"So, am I to understand then that you contend that events don't have antecedents?"

Nope.  I was trying contend that a specific event, the insight/intuition event, doesn't have an antecedent.

It's not a "truth," it's a contention.

"I sort of always thought that processes lead to events, and that it's often a bit subjective where one separates the two?"

Yup.  Process does lead to events.  The contention is that process doesn't lead to this particular event.

Your proposition opens up neat new line of thought:  the yin yang thing.  In this thread, it can be looked at in one of its suggestions, that there's a little bit of truth in every lie, and a little bit of lie in every truth.

I'm not married to my initial proposal or my current contention, just putting them up for the sake of discussion.  There have been some pretty good refutations so far. In a discussion forum, the process seems to be the point, or is it vice-versa?

Wish I could be more insightful...

Best, Jim

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


34 posted 04-26-2007 03:29 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze



eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee


OW

Ron, you just became the cute one, again!

LMAO
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


35 posted 04-26-2007 06:32 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Uh, I don't know the mythmakers (or mythbusters, see?), but did somebody mention scoobysnacks?

Ron gets to wear purple all the time, and I'm stuck with those funky glasses.

Hmmm, I guess I'm stuck with p- envy (or is that a different thread?).
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


36 posted 04-26-2007 06:39 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

shaking my head--

the visuals are gettin' to me

*ahem*

To address the question, tho:

How the hell would I know? I would ask for a free, thirty day trial period (for LOGIC, heh) but I can't write and think at the same time.

And now, after reading the above post, I truly know I can't think.

About much else.

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


37 posted 04-26-2007 09:13 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I was trying contend that a specific event, the insight/intuition event, doesn't have an antecedent.

Ah. So you do want to throw out cause and effect, Jim? You believe that Newton's Eureka moment with the apple, or Einstein's with the equivalence of mass and energy, could just as readily have happened to any Joe Schmoe on the street? Clearly, if there is to be no antecedent to insight then there can be nothing we can do to prepare ourselves for it.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


38 posted 04-26-2007 10:45 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Okay.

I'll behave.

But this brought up something that Joseph Campbell touched on in one of the Bill Moyers interviews.

and I'm gonna have to search my DVD's too, 'cause I can't find the quote, so please forgive my faulty memory and paraphrasing. The conversation they were having was the difference between an epiphany and what is termed in more spiritual circles as a "peak experience."

A peak experience, generally has some foresight and intent, whereas an ephiphany can occur more spontaneously, and is not necessarily deemed as a lovely experience. An epiphany, however, can be a result of horrible trauma beyond a person's control.

Is that anything close to what you are saying Ron?

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


39 posted 04-26-2007 11:11 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

frown...

Okay, I couldn't remember the word. (That happens to me from time to time.)

But Campbell and Joyce agreed that one word that distinguished an epiphany from a peak experience is that it must be "sublime."

A word we usually take to mean "exquisite" and normally has a positive connotation-- but Joe pointed out that sublime does not necessarily mean "beautiful."

I found this interesting--a "peak experience" would be more desirable as an affimation of what we had prepared ourselves for, whereas an epiphany, or "sudden insight" can be life altering, and horribly frightening--such as described in, for example, the visitation of angels in the Old Testament, or...terrible shocks, such as a an unexpected death in the family or even storms.

sublime...yes, yes, she was.
Stephanos
Deputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 07-31-2000
Posts 3496
Statesboro, GA, USA


40 posted 04-27-2007 12:18 AM       View Profile for Stephanos   Email Stephanos   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Stephanos's Home Page   View IP for Stephanos

Karen,

I think what you are describing is something imposed upon us from without ... or if not "without", at least from someone or somewhere else.  In which case, a logical deduction is not necessary, seeing we are being fed an insight that is someone else's.  This is where "revelation" might come into play.  


It may sound spooky, but in reality it can be quite simple (in theory) as any form of communication.


But I agree with Ron, that whatever it is, whether from oneself or someone else, insight has an antecedent source.  It doesn't just pop up randomly.  


Stephen.
jbouder
Member Elite
since 09-18-99
Posts 2641
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash


41 posted 04-27-2007 08:31 AM       View Profile for jbouder   Email jbouder   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for jbouder

Jim:

I just don't get it.  How can you argue that intuition and insight are not a process?  Perhaps logical formulae can be regarded as a formal intellectual exercise and intuition/insight can be considered an intellectual process (a "fuzzy" logic - intuitively making connections between phenomena and drawing conclusions from the same without considering all the data), but I'm unconvinced by your assertion that intuition/insight is an event.  

Since intuition and insight are typically applied to a particular problem, then the problem is the antecedent.  All behavior - reflex and operant behavior - is preceded by an antecedent.  The antecedent is the event, object, problem, etc. ... - not intuition/insight.  I suppose the discoveries attained through the applications of intuition and insight are events as well.  Consequences to the application of intuition or insight, if you will.

The other Jim
oceanvu2
Senior Member
since 02-24-2007
Posts 1007
Santa Monica, California, USA


42 posted 04-27-2007 05:59 PM       View Profile for oceanvu2   Email oceanvu2   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for oceanvu2

Hi All -- I think that some of you might have noticed that I suffer from IDD -- Intellectual Deficeit Disorder...

To comment briefly on one or two of the great thoughts above:

Other Jim:  Yes, an implication of the proposal is that every insight is available to every Joe Schmoe, though some Joe Schmoe's might not know what to make of it.  Somewhere in here is the makings of a wonderful Monty Python sketch....

I see the merit in arguing that Einstein's formal academic process of studying everything then known (or of interest to him) about physics, gave him a ground in which to make use of his insight.  I wonder, and really don't know, what process grounded Ramanujan, or why Planck didn't get it in the first...

Serenity:  Thank you for pointing out the differences you see between "epiphany" and insight/intuition.  With this new, and dare I say insightful, light, I'll be more careful.

Passing thoughts:  I don't wiki my references.  All of this nonsense is in my head.  I think of my brain as a jar of Prego spaghetti sauce.  All kinds of ingredients are in there, including too much salt, and some ingredients I wish weren't in there at all.

As a Freudian slip, I offer:  "Freud was a seminal thinker."

Next, but not last:  I've been trying to avoid the rhetorical strategy of throwing "sand in the eyes of the bull," that one remembered from William Pirsig's "Zen and the "Art of Motorcycle Maintenance."

And finally, my mind seems to make bizarre, if not particularly useful or insightful connections.  This thread started out with a little satirical poem that was running around in my head.  I've since been preoccupied with the start of another one:

     Out of the mythos and into the logos
     To Grandmother's house we go.
     Descartes knew the way
     To follow the sleigh
     Over the bounding snow-ow...
  
Jimbeaux
Edward Grim
Senior Member
since 12-18-2005
Posts 1112
Greenville, South Carolina


43 posted 04-27-2007 07:20 PM       View Profile for Edward Grim   Email Edward Grim   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Edward Grim's Home Page   View IP for Edward Grim

"I suffer from IDD -- Intellectual Deficeit Disorder... "

You're right Jim, you're stupid and Michael Jordan can't play basketball.

Yeah I have IDHD (Intellectual Deficit Hyperstupidity Disorder). Coherent thoughts be damned!

It's hereditary I think. My father has it in spades and his father was a lawyer too, so there ya go.

Head Cheese & Chicken Feet

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Is logic useful?   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors