[FRIAM] New ways of understanding the world

[uǝlƃ ↙↙↙]

I like the reference to structure, but not the reference to "in the beginning", which smacks of foundationalism. 

Unfortunately, I can't agree with Nick, even ignoring convergence. I am anti-foundationalist. So appeals to a universal logic are problematic. I think I ahdere to a fairly standard understanding of "logic" as fundamentally about *consequence*, what is guaranteed to obtain, what is likely to obtain, and what is so incoherent as to be unconsiderable. And it's importantly *syntactic*, not necessarily semantic. Logic needs no referent. Reason, however, does need a referent. Reason relies on logic, but is not limited by it.

This maps to the idea of structure. Logic is really just the distinction between what fits together and what doesn't fit together. That's all it is. There is no "right thinking", only whether or not you're following the rules of the game or not. And it remains to be seen if there is a universal logic. But there is a fantastic website for it: https://www.uni-log.org/


On 12/1/20 9:26 AM, Douglass Carmichael wrote:
> With the election and work i have not kept up.. so this might be obvious but 
> 
> the origin  of “logic” is the greek logos, which means structure.  If we compare economy with ecology we see that /nomos/ means man made law whereas /logos/ is structure in nature. (even the old testament has in the begin was the /word/, but the original Greek has “in the beginning was /logos/” 
> 
>> On Dec 1, 2020, at 9:15 AM, <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> <thompnickson2 at gmail.com <mailto:thompnickson2 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> “the ambiguity in the word "logic" that Nick often glosses over”
>>  
>> Ok, let’s put this to rest, once and for all.  I am going to try to steelman a position here that we can agree on
>>  
>> I stipulate that there are many logics.  Certainly as many logics as there are maths.  So, what is true of all “logics”?   A logic is a proposed set of principles of right thinking. Thinking is “right” when it leads to expectations that prove out in the long run.  What thinking is “right” depends on what one  is thinking about.  Some logic’s are more basic, more universal than others.  In the very long run, we may hope to discover and agree upon fundamental principles underlying all logics, a logic of logics, if you ill. But for the foreseeable future what argument is logical will depend on what we are talking about.  
>>  


-- 
↙↙↙ uǝlƃ