|
| | | | Boolean mathematical operations are observed? No, they are accepted by convention. You cannot say that logic does not work without proof and also that it depends on causality. This leads to an infinite series of proving the givens. Just as the science of physics is built upon taking on faith the concepts of matter and mass and time, the "givens" of physics, logical arguments are built upon the "givens" that are taken on faith without proof.
There is an obvious remedy to your complaint, derpdeederp. And are philosophical questions ever resolved? |
| |
| | | | Bree:
To a minimum extent, you're right - but axioms that cannot be proven within a system are still confirmed by experience. Experience voids faith.
I'd love to see you develop a coherent mathematical system that did not have Boolean Logic. Hell, tell you what, you build a computer that doesn't depend on Boolean Logic, and then I'll concede that they're not observed.
The key point in my post to you wasn't the Boolean operations, it was the arguments. Logic depends on our causal view of reality - and hey, experience confirms that.
That said, there is no a priori mechanism at work there. Logic depends on experience. |
| |
| | | | Experience does not void faith. It is built on faith. Experience requires faith in our abilities to correctly perceive and analyze our observations. I am sure you have heard the expression "I couldn't believe my eyes!"
As math is nothing more than a language, I'm sure you could develop any system you like as long as everyone agrees on the conventions.
The "boolean logic" that computers are built on is the opening and closing of physical electrical circuits. True and false equates to opened and closed gates to control the flow of electricity to display graphics on your screen or eject the CD in your CD drive.This message was edited by bree on 8-20-06 @ 10:51 AM |
| |
| | | | Bree:
I'm a trained computer scientist, and a trained philosopher. When I say something in definite, technical terms, I mean it in definite technical terms. You cannot build a computer without Boolean Logic - that means that there is experiential knowledge behind Boolean Logic. There is no faith behind it. We know it works, because it's been proven to work.
Faith is blind, and fundamentally antithetical to experience. Read William James' "Mysticism" for more information. |
| |
| | | | whitefeather~
Faith and love are two things that no other things in life can match. And really, there is no logic to this, only faith if I make any sense on that. Logic may prove pretty much anything, yet faith will win against logic every time. I am glad to hear of the visit.
Logic is a thing we all know can change the world, faith is the only thing that can change logic.
"To know, is to know you know nothing."
-Confucius |
| |
| | | | you are confusing Logic with Science
logic is used by science to create physical laws
Logic is used to create theories based on what is known.
Logic can be used to figure out what someone 'should do next'
faith can use logic to proceed with certain given's like "God exists and he is a loving being and cares about each and everyone of us"
(which most of the universe contradicts in my experiance)
or God is a vengeful S. o. B who will come down on you HARD when you die which many fundamentalists appear to believe at least i've been condemned a few times.
|
| |
| | | | You can be a trained organ grinder's monkey, khristopher, and I give your opinion that you can't build a computer without logic the same merit. Software requires boolean logic. Computers require opened and closed electronic circuits.
Experience is blind. Read Descartes.This message was edited by bree on 8-20-06 @ 11:04 PM |
| |
| | | | Bree:
Nope, CPUs require boolean logic too. How do you think jumps, branches, and predictive execution works? How about Buses? How about hamming codes in error checking memory?
And Descartes was wrong, read Hume.  You want to just compare philosophers that we've read?  This message was edited by khristofer on 8-20-06 @ 11:36 PM |
| |
| | | | Khristofer... damn impressive... keep it up (yes, you deserve congrats for your reasoning).
Boyakasha. |
| |
| | | | Canth... there is a big difference between reality and what should be when it comes to your statement. If you replace the word should with does, in your statements, you will find how most here think. If your statement were the way things were prcticed in reality, life would be grand. In fact, any logically minded person would run screaming away from the insanity of the Pork boards.
Although I agree with you on what logic and faith "should" be, I do not believe they are anything near what they should be, especially here.For one human being to love another; that is perhaps the most difficult of all our tasks, the ultimate, the last test and proof, the work for which all other work is but preparation.
Rainer Maria Rilke
"To know, is to know you know nothing."
-Confucius |
| |
|
|