The Failure Of Logic - Page 7

Dov · #61 10-24-2004, 05:52 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a thought experiment for you. Is it logical to step off a 20-story building ... if you want to die?

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends where you land and what you're wearing. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Just playing Cris.

Dov

Al Mirpuri · #62 10-25-2004, 10:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Al,

My point is that your "thought experiment" expresses what is known as a "logical absurdity;" it is a criticism of a given legal standard -- an automatic death penalty -- and not a criticism of logic itself.

That legal standard permits logical conclusions which are absurd -- that is, outrageous and/or harmful -- and thus creates a "logical absurdity." The Court recognized this logical absurdity, and changed the law.

Here's a thought experiment for you. Is it logical to step off a 20-story building ... if you want to die?

Cris

[/ QUOTE ]

Dear Cris,

I could have come up with another thought experiment highlighting the failure of logic to guide one in life. A man with terminal cancer has little to fear by way of consequences. In the UK, such a person, a few years back, decided to murder an old workmate and did. I am making no criticism of the legal standard employed in my thought experiment.

If a man hell bent on committing suicide decided to jump off a tall building then it would be logical for him to do so if he believed he would accomplish the extinction of his life by doing so.

Yours,

Al Mirpuri.

Al Mirpuri · #63 10-25-2004, 10:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It would be better to beat you all into agreeing to my point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]

Spoken like a true religious fanatic.

If the arguments don't seem to work, bring out the swords.

Dov

[/ QUOTE ]

Dear Dov,

If people look at the original post there was no mention of religion.

I am a Christian so violence is not allowed me.

The text you quote is a trenchant observation about how to bring consensus on any given issue. For example, Saddam Hussain and the US were in disagreement about his holding of WMD. What did the US resort to? Logic and Reason? No. Violence.

Moreover, the secular ideologies of Nazism and Communism produced death and suffering on a mammoth scale. Did you miss this?

Yours,

Al Mirpuri.

rookieplus · #64 10-25-2004, 11:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
is this a murder case or a robbery and self defense case?
for some reason im under the impression homeowners dont have the right to simply shoot burglars just because they broke into a house, they must make efforts to avoid the burglar and use deadly force only if their lives are in danger, deadly force is not accpetable to protect property. the way the court systems seem to be these days, i would think he would be ok to just leave without killing any more people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Self-defense is not available to the shooter in this situation.

In most states (if not all) a homeowner may use deadly physical force to interrupt a burglary and has no duty to retreat inside his own home.

-former prosecutor and now defense attorney

rookieplus · #65 10-25-2004, 11:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly the point to make. There has to be some reward for not doing MORE to victims (lighter sentence), because otherwaise, all the rapists and burglers out there will just kill there victims. People will do what benefits them, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a "reward" or more accurately a mitigation for not killing the other occupants of the house though in teh heat of the crime, no criminal would recognize it.

Defending this guy in the death penalty phase of his trial I would present evidence that he had means and opportunity to kill the other victims. Using this, I would argue that the murder may have been either unintentional or panic driven and that he is not the type of sociopath that ought to be executed.

I believe most juries would at least consider that the absence of a second victim when there would have been one if the burglar was a truly depraved sociopath, is a potential factor that weighs in favor of a life sentence instead of a death sentence.

-former prosecutor and defense attorney

carlo · #66 10-25-2004, 01:00 PM

Dear Al,

Logic cannot be a way of life but only a connector of truth in manifestation. A syllogism is only as true as its premise and if the premise is in error then the "logic" of the situation is really no more than an clouded consciousness falling into corruption.

Logic or reason connects truths of our world which are common to all men. If we cannot agree to a truth, the reality is that we are living in feeling where each individual has a piece of his specificity. The fact that you like apples which I despise for I like oranges is a matter of individual feeling which can only separate us from the reality of truth.

The reality of the truth in the apples and oranges is the objective understanding of the truth in apples and oranges. To do this we must see what an apple and orange is divorced from our sympathies and antipathies. The truth of the apple comes from the apple itself and likewise the orange. In this truth there is also a logic divorced again from our feeling natures which we can all follow.

From the above you may glean that only through thinking can people come together in truth.Cosmic and planetary truths are a beginning in this matter.

Individuality comes to us via our will forces through which we manifest our individual being. A man who builds a bridge manifests his individuality as does one who studies Aristotle. The truths of the human spirit is the same for each of them and are to be recognized as objective manifestations.

The perpetrator of this henious crime was living in a clouded consciousness totally divorced from the logic of truth and the word for his behavior is called irrationality.

regards,
carlo

Gamblor · #67 10-26-2004, 02:13 PM

David, weren't you the lead character in I, Robot?

Anyhoo, real people have these things called "emotions". And they are far more powerful drivers of action than logic.

Say what you want about which is better or which is more useful, the previous sentence is a fact.

A_C_Slater · #68 10-26-2004, 08:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think this shows that logic is flawed or that the system is flawed?

[/ QUOTE ]

The thought experiment I presented was to show that those who are in love with logic (and opposed to religion) should not be so smug because logic can lead to all sorts of terrible consequences. Hitler was a logician of the finest order. His logic shocked the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is logical to kill the mother and child from the
perspective of the intruder. It minimizes his risk of
getting caught to the maximum.

I do agree that Hitler was a masterful logician, that's how
he got to where he did. No one could stand up to his impeccable rationalizing and fiery whip-brand rhetoric.

And I also, agree that logic is only one of many islands and
is indeed infallible and cannot possibly account for everything. I think lieutenant Tuvok teaches us this on
every single episode of Star Trek Voyager. Those damn
logical Vulcans! Don't they know there's more to life than
logic. LOVE YAYYYYYYYY GAYYYYYY [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Dov · #69 10-27-2004, 04:37 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am a Christian so violence is not allowed me.

[/ QUOTE ]

What were the Crusades? A homewarming party?

[ QUOTE ]
The text you quote is a trenchant observation about how to bring consensus on any given issue. For example, Saddam Hussain and the US were in disagreement about his holding of WMD. What did the US resort to? Logic and Reason? No. Violence.

[/ QUOTE ]

The US and its allies attempted to reason with Saddam for over 10 years. When it was finally determined beyond a shadow of a doubt that he wasn't cooperating, then the decision was made to escalate the consequences. Logic and Reason dictated the consequences.

Are you suggesting that Saddam was correct in his application of force during his reign to his subjects? This was applied from a religious perspective as well.

In our world, to some degree, might makes right. An analogous concept is that of the Golden Rule. (He who has the gold makes the rules.) This is the nature of things right now. Whether or not this is the optimal condition for us to be in is another matter entirely.

To not prepare for and confront violence when it occurs only encourages its use as an effective means of forcing an opinion on someone else. Those who choose a violent path often do not understand other ways of interacting with people to get what they want.

That doesn't excuse them, however.

You seemed to indicate that since you couldn't get people to agree with you on the merits of your argument(s), that you should simply ram it down their throats, as if that would solve your problem.

Obviously, your understanding of human nature is seriously lacking.

Dov

Dov · #70 10-27-2004, 04:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Logic cannot be a way of life but only a connector of truth in manifestation. A syllogism is only as true as its premise and if the premise is in error then the "logic" of the situation is really no more than an clouded consciousness falling into corruption.

[/ QUOTE ]

Logic does not define truth. It is a process for extracting information from existing data. If a premise is in error, then the conclusion may not apply to a given situation, but it will still be logical.

Truth and Logic are not the same thing. It makes no difference if a logical argument is true or not as long as it is valid.

Dov