| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Spooked " |
| Date: |
30 May 2004 05:39:00 PM |
| Object: |
Logic: Classic, Constructive and Relevant |
Logic.
From a classical view, everything is assumed to be either true or
false, independent of whether or not we know which is the case.
In the constructive view, the emphasis is not on truth in
the abstract, but on the means of verification. We are justified in
asserting that a statement is true only when we have verified that it
is true. We can correctly assert that the statement is false only
when we have verified that it is false.
In fact, the classical and constructive viewpoints differ even as to
what constitutes a legitimate definition. There is not always a
single answer to the question "is this argument valid?", hence logical
pluralism.
"A pluralist approach shows...more kinds of logic, and shows how
different logics reflect different philosophies."
http://atlas.math.vanderbilt.edu/~schectex/logics/
Relevant Logic:
"The logic is placed in the context of possible world semantics and
situation semantics, which are then applied to provide an
understanding of the various logical particles (especially implication
and negation) and natural language conditionals."
http://books.cambridge.org/0521829232.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevant_logic
POSITIVE AGNOSTICISM IN BELIEF REVISION
www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/~tnorman/sac/papers/Girle.pdf
"To be intelligent, machine agents must embody some of the conceptual
distinctions and functions which are at the centre of cognitive
activity. The distinction between knowing and believing is one such
distinction. The ability to change beliefs is one such function."
"This document discusses simple Boolean logic, because it's
commonplace and relatively easy to understand."
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html
Constructive logic, Relevant logic and belief revision systems seem to
be very appropriate concerning personal matters such as philosophy.
Boolean logic seems out of place here.
Would the difference in logical reason one uses in the thought process
explain the difference between atheists and agnostics?
Aside, where does classic logic fit within personal extensions of
love, friendship and business?
"logic is not a set of rules which govern human behavior"
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html
I find that logic most certainly does govern my own behavior, ergo
daily decisions, actions/reactions. Only occasional and overwhelming
emotions render my personal system defunct.
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Relevant Russell, in case y'all missed it ...
Was Hitler a Christian? Some relevant Hitler quotes
!Relevant Repost: Pseudo Leadership and Black Groupthink
Re: "Craig Chilton" has an obvious **aversion** to relevant FACTS,Maturity, & telling the TRUTH.
Let's make the tard's post relevant to this discussion, shall we?
Re: Infantile Loser, "craig chilton," has an obvious **aversion** to relevant FACTS, Maturity, & telling the TRUTH.
Re: "Craig Chilton" has an obvious **aversion** to relevant FACTS,Maturity, & telling the TRUTH.
The Holocaust: Is it still relevant?
| Re: "Craig Chilton" has an obvious **aversion** to relevant FACTS,Maturity, & telling the TRUTH.
OT: Time for America to Be Relevant in Cuba
A Classic Atheist Book now is Finished and on the Web
All wasteful falls are hidden and other possible nails are classic, but will Julieta guarantee that?
Classic 14thdisciple - "Jesus and the Miracles"
Classic USENET Quote (was Re: how does one die for other people's sin?)
Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh classic steam car folks
|
|
|
