Re: Preface: Going Further
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is SK pointing out that to conclude P about the world using logic requires starting with some premise that is not logically deduced and has to be taken on faith.
[/ QUOTE ]
DING!DING!DING!DING!DING!
Logic is a set of rules for making valid deductions from assumptions, i.e. premisses accepted on faith. This does not mean that faith is, or should be, immune to the judgments of logic, but there is a certain art to such endeavors ("What [doubting] those ancient Greeks . . . regarded as a task for a whole lifetime . . . . faith was a task for a whole lifetime").
I'm leaving for OSU in a couple minutes, but I'll get back to this after the game.
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
Partial credit. Logic is a set of rules for making valid deductions. The basis for these deductions might be an accumulation of known facts , rather than assumptions. Assumptions are frequently used to create a theory or thesis which then they may attempt to prove logically from facts known or derived. Only in pure philosphy, maybe, are deductions made from assumptions.
[/ QUOTE ]
I want my full credit. What are these known facts from which you start?
chez
[/ QUOTE ]
Sigh. Okay, some things have to start out as definitions. That 'color' is 'red'. We assume everyone agrees with these 'universal' definitions. From that standpoint everything might be considered an assumption. We assume that since gravity seems to always work, that it is a constant, and it has been measured to be that way. What is acceptable to you as a proof may not be acceptable to sometone else. Semantics will bog down anything.
Partial credit only.
|