1 2
41 42 43
62 63
Posted: 6/17/2009 6:04 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 6:11 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Logic is intuition. That's the point. You are born with the facility of logic. An already set in stone system for how things works. A system that preceeds observation and expriense. A system that requires no anyalasis to develope it. This debate on the human brain was a demonstration to show that people don't use their logical facilities. Kuwanga was the only one [who posted] to realize that you cannot logically say either side is factual or not. No one else grasped that, they were too busy having egos or just being unable to see it.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 6:07 PM
Quote
Kuwaga
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
sixofour wrote:
If nothing is absolute, then you know nothing, because everything is meaningless.
I know nothing, though I'm not so sure about that.
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:05 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
sixofour wrote:
Logic is intuition. That's the point.
The point is meaningless and/or wrong. Logic cannot be intuition, because logic was developed by humans. It isn't implicit to us in any way, and a computer can use logic. And a computer has no intuition.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:06 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:08 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Oh lol..really now? What system did we use to develope logic? What was the basis for humanities development of logic? And, how did they know that basis was correct? And, how did they know they even needed a basis? How did they know they needed logic?
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:08 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Observation.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:08 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:10 PM)
Quote
Kuwaga
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Intuition. Observation isn't a system, it only provides data. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:09 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:16 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
But how did observation help them? You are saying they observed two objects coming to gether, and called it 2. How did they know that? How did they know about the function of "adding"? Yes Kuwanga, observation provides data. What LagDotcom is saying they used data, without any kind of system for organizing or understanding that data, to build a system for understanding. He claims that at one point people couldn't tell the difference between left or right, had no concepts of numbers, and didn't have the capacity to attach names to things. If they observed two animals doing something, then months later, they ahd a baby. He claims, they wouldn't have known that the action thsoe two animals did many months ago, lead to this new baby.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:11 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Now you are confusing the issue. Logic is not addition. Neither is our innate 'sense of number'.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:11 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Addition is something that requires logic to know. Its intuition. You are basiclly saying humans at one time did not have the ability to form systems at all. Then they observed something, then magiclly had a system to build systems.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:18 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
I'm saying you don't need logic to form 'systems'. Imagine you are a primitive man, observing the sun rising and setting every day. You could logically say it makes sense to move around during the day when you can see better. You could also do it without making that logical leap, because it makes 'common sense', which is another thing entirely different from logic. I'm not denying logic has been and continues to be useful for rigour when needed. I'm saying it's not always needed.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:19 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:19 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
A system is by definition a set of logical rules. We build computers and base them off a set of logical rules, the same way everything else is absed on a set of logical rules.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:19 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Tell that to systems that are illogical.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:21 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Systems that don't have logic cannot function. People can twist and distort entities or results of a system in ways that are illogical, but the actual functioning follows a logic. Systems don't randomly do things, they would fall apart if that were the case.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:22 PM
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
I don't mean "has no logic", I mean "has faulty logic". Many systems have been designed including faulty logic, and continue to be designed and used today. They are apparently no less valid to the people who still follow and learn them.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:25 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Sure, anyways the point is, in order for humans to develope anything at all, it is required that they have a logical way of doing something. Randomness doesn't produce organization.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:27 PM
Post subject: ASK BISQWIT
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Mathematics deals with logic. People deal with fuzzier concepts like "how I feel" and "what I want". If what they want is to group together then more power to them. You are not explaining anything.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:29 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:32 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Mathematics wasn't developed it was discovered. Meaning, it was already there, and the system its based on "logic" was already there. And my position is that people intuitivly have the ability to use logic. Even if they don't know that its logic they are using, or what its called. When I took logic classes I didn't learn any new ways to understand anything, I simply learned the terminology for what I already knew about. And I also posit that many people abandon this facility all together in favor of moral relativism. What goes along with what they want or feel, it taken over what is right and logical.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:32 PM
Post subject: ASK BISQWIT 2
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Uh. No. It was developed. We assume it is the only sensible way to represent things abstractly because it makes sense to humans (well, some of us). Every now and again mathematical thinking changes. Does that make all the old mathematical thinking wrong? I guess it could. Imagine a paradigm shift in the future that makes all the old logic we'd used incorrect. Mathematic concepts like arithmetic are also used by people who have absolutely no understanding of logic. I'm sure you could (and would) argue that they are somehow innately using logic. I dispute this claim. Instinct does many things for you.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:34 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Um, math was not developed. But whatever. Ways of understanding math were developed, sure. Ways of exoplaining mathamatical forumla were developed sure. But 2 apples and 6 oranges doesn't make 8 fruit because humans said it does. It makes 8 fruit because it does, whether humans know about it or not. Its an infalliable universal fact.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:38 PM
Post subject: ASK BISQWIT WITH A VENGEANCE
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
I'm not arguing 6 + 2 = 8. I'm arguing "man sees 8 fruit means he uses logic". The brain has many functions, and one of them is logic.
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:42 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
OH, Whether they USE logic or not is one thing. I'm just saying most people are born with the ability to understand logical things. When you go to school, your teacher in kindergarden or what ever, tells you what numbers are, she tells you what the plus and minus sign do. Then she gives you 10 problems, and you have to use your intuition, and the tools provided by her [numbers and functions] to solve those problems. And its required that you have both. [tools and intuition] The tools alone won't tell you the answer for every problem. And you cannot teach intuition. 6+2=8 "because it does"
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:44 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:46 PM)
Post subject: ASK BISQWIT WILL NOW RESUME
Quote
LagDotCom
Joined: 3/7/2006
Posts: 720
Location: UK
Oh, now it's "most people" :) I think that's enough of a victory to rest for the time being. It's certainly more thread unravelling than I'd hoped. Apologies, fearless leader. Edit: and i thought you said logic was innate to human beings, not "human beings who aren't retarded"
Voted NO for NO reason
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:45 PM
(Edited: 6/17/2009 10:47 PM)
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Well, some people are born retarded. Hence "most people". I could ahve said "everyone" but then someone would have came along and said "wut abert dem retards lulz". edit: you are nitpicking. I think you know what I mean, the normal, sane born person is born with logical facilities.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:46 PM
Quote
Kuwaga
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
I guess your claim that logic is nothing more than intuition is still wrong. Logic is more than that. Intuition is subjective. Logic is something that many people can agree on. It's "multi-subjective", if that's even a word. It's not objective though, but as close as we can get. You could maybe call logic our common essence of intuition. It's that part of our intuition that manages to stand the most reality checks. Intuition is entirely subjective. Logic is a common system. More reality checks can be executed on a common system. That's the main difference in my eyes. Logic is superior in many ways, but for more personal matters intuition often works better. Because logic doesn't do a good job at taking the individual into account.
Posted: 6/17/2009 10:48 PM
Quote
sixofour
Banned User
Joined: 5/2/2009
Posts: 121
Kuwanga. 2+6=8. Sure we can all "agree" that it is, but anyone who thinks its not, is catagoricly, absolutly wrong. Saying Logic is not objective is saying that math is not objective, because in order for us to use math, we need the absolute system of logic.
[00:31:12] <stickie> by the way, thanks for the sig sixofour [00:31:23] <sixofour> dejavu [00:31:25] <sixofour> what sig? [00:31:55] <stickie> you will just have to find out *insert mystical music*
1 2
41 42 43
62 63