Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Christopher13 · 03-23-2003, 10:10 AM

This definition of logic is simply what is arrived at when a person reflects critically on the use of his intellect. It is perceived that it obeys certain rules and makes the assertion that logic exists. This cannot be demonstrated to the satisfaction of those ensnared by radical doubt and skepticism.
Likewise, it is folly to argue that the world does not exist. You, John Page, act as if the world exists don't you? It is impossible to function without accepting reality. It is simply a primordial truth that things exist and can be penetrated by the human mind. It is what the mind is made for, so to speak-- to know the truth. Most modern philosophies deny this, and thus are not proper philosophies. This is only to talk realistically about things. I have not expressed myself well perhaps because it is hard to make a rebuttal to positions of extreme doubt about the world and the mind's capacities. What say you?

John Page · 03-23-2003, 04:52 PM

Chris:

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
This definition of logic is simply what is arrived at when a person reflects critically on the use of his intellect.

Please clarify which definition of logic you are referring to.

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
Likewise, it is folly to argue that the world does not exist.

But what is it and how does it exist?

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
It is what the mind is made for, so to speak-- to know the truth.

Truth

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
Most modern philosophies deny this, and thus are not proper philosophies.

Proper philosophies? How can I tell?

Cheers, John

Christopher13 · 03-24-2003, 10:34 AM

John, logic studies the way reason works is a suitable definition to me.
What is the world? In a way, this curious question is peculiar to modern man, but it is also a fundamental question of philosophy, particularly metaphysics which seeks to understand being in itself. The world is what it is. Upon reflection, certain categories are arrived at such as the basic ones of nature and existence. We see that things can be imagined, for example, like unicorns, but also not exist, causing us to posit the distinction in the same thing between its nature and its act of actually existing. And so on.
This answers your question of how the world exists. It exists through a radical act of existence, intuited in a primordial way by the intellect of everyone who knows. The mind is made to attain this being of things. When philosophy reflects on this so-called intuition of being, it posits the concept of esse, the Latin for to-be or act of existing, which is possessed by various natures in the real world. It is suggested in Thomist philosophy, which is where I'm coming from if you haven't guessed, that without this grasp of the radical nature of what it means to be versus not be, you cannot have a real philosophy. Most modern philosophies, while possessing great insights, a priori dismiss metaphysics and the mind's ability to attain to the truth of the real. They are thus sidetracked from the get-go from philosophy's main task--to know the "truth of all things."

John Page · 03-24-2003, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
John, logic studies the way reason works is a suitable definition to me.

How about just "The mind contemplating itself". Thus if the unknown contemplative mechanism of mind is labelled "reason" then we have "Reason studies the way logic works".

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
....without this grasp of the radical nature of what it means to be versus not be, you cannot have a real philosophy.

But existence is ordinary, everyday. Still a puzzle exactly how we perceive our own existence but brain science is coming along nicely....

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
They are thus sidetracked from the get-go from philosophy's main task--to know the "truth of all things."

I prefer "to achieve the understanding of all things"

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
...When philosophy reflects on this so-called intuition of being, it posits the concept of esse, the Latin for to-be or act of existing,....

Essence

Cheers, John

Christopher13 · 03-25-2003, 01:09 PM

John, I might say that the "mind contemplating itself" is too vague a definition of logic. The mind has plenty to contemplate besides logical rules. But let's not quibble.
As for the act of existing, it is not ordinary! I mean, in philosophy, it is absolutely essential to grasp what it means for anything real to have this act of existence, the to-being of a thing. This ultimately elucidates what it means for God to be His own Act of Existing, the identity of His Essence and His Existence, and so forth.
But maybe someone could put us back on the Truth track. (Just to be mischievous, here's a Thomist thought:truth is the corrsepondence of the knowing mind and the known, that is the existence of the real as objective form in the mind of the knower, making the mind open to being-all-things, or, as you say, John, understanding all things . . . .)

John Page · 03-25-2003, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
John, I might say that the "mind contemplating itself" is too vague a definition of logic. The mind has plenty to contemplate besides logical rules. But let's not quibble.

But how does it contemplate itself? Can it be viewed as a series of logical operations? Is it a series of logical operations? How is truth inculcated[sic] and brought to our attention?

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
As for the act of existing, it is not ordinary! I mean, in philosophy, it is absolutely essential to grasp what it means for anything real to have this act of existence, the to-being of a thing. This ultimately elucidates what it means for God to be His own Act of Existing, the identity of His Essence and His Existence, and so forth.

But we exist now, there are billions of us, trillions when you count the other life forms.... each atom is a separately measureable piece of reality... its pretty awesome - but totally ordinary.

god? What of this notion that we use to explain to ourselves that there are causes we do not understand? Where is the evidence that there is some anthropomorphic being behind the theater of reality? Your mind is your master, but do not let it fool you. The concept of god has purpose and function but is not "truth".

Quote:

Originally posted by Christopher13
.....thought:truth is the corrsepondence of the knowing mind and the known, that is the existence of the real as objective form in the mind of the knower, making the mind open to being-all-things, or, as you say, John, understanding all things . . . .)

I like it. Try "Truth can be measured from the correspondence between the knowing mind and reality." This gives the basis for establishing the facts about truth.

Cheers, John

Nowhere357 · 03-30-2003, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sur-reality
Another thread had taken an interesting turn on the subject of presupposition. So here is i think the main question : can we know anything without presupposing anything and is there anyone who knows if i am spelling presupposition correctly?

This thread is a lot of fun, and that is the truth. (I think.)

IMO there is subjective experience, such as pain. We require no presuppositions to know that we hurt, but maybe that's not 'knowledge' per se.

Every world-view that I've seen so far, includes presupposition. I am starting to presuppose the inevitability of this.

Logic is a tool, that is all. "This statement is a lie." Logic works on this about as well as a rock cuts paper.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-23-2003, 10:10 AM	#21
Christopher13 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: usa Posts: 28	This definition of logic is simply what is arrived at when a person reflects critically on the use of his intellect. It is perceived that it obeys certain rules and makes the assertion that logic exists. This cannot be demonstrated to the satisfaction of those ensnared by radical doubt and skepticism. Likewise, it is folly to argue that the world does not exist. You, John Page, act as if the world exists don't you? It is impossible to function without accepting reality. It is simply a primordial truth that things exist and can be penetrated by the human mind. It is what the mind is made for, so to speak-- to know the truth. Most modern philosophies deny this, and thus are not proper philosophies. This is only to talk realistically about things. I have not expressed myself well perhaps because it is hard to make a rebuttal to positions of extreme doubt about the world and the mind's capacities. What say you?

03-24-2003, 10:34 AM	#23
Christopher13 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: usa Posts: 28	John, logic studies the way reason works is a suitable definition to me. What is the world? In a way, this curious question is peculiar to modern man, but it is also a fundamental question of philosophy, particularly metaphysics which seeks to understand being in itself. The world is what it is. Upon reflection, certain categories are arrived at such as the basic ones of nature and existence. We see that things can be imagined, for example, like unicorns, but also not exist, causing us to posit the distinction in the same thing between its nature and its act of actually existing. And so on. This answers your question of how the world exists. It exists through a radical act of existence, intuited in a primordial way by the intellect of everyone who knows. The mind is made to attain this being of things. When philosophy reflects on this so-called intuition of being, it posits the concept of esse, the Latin for to-be or act of existing, which is possessed by various natures in the real world. It is suggested in Thomist philosophy, which is where I'm coming from if you haven't guessed, that without this grasp of the radical nature of what it means to be versus not be, you cannot have a real philosophy. Most modern philosophies, while possessing great insights, a priori dismiss metaphysics and the mind's ability to attain to the truth of the real. They are thus sidetracked from the get-go from philosophy's main task--to know the "truth of all things."

03-25-2003, 01:09 PM	#25
Christopher13 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: usa Posts: 28	John, I might say that the "mind contemplating itself" is too vague a definition of logic. The mind has plenty to contemplate besides logical rules. But let's not quibble. As for the act of existing, it is not ordinary! I mean, in philosophy, it is absolutely essential to grasp what it means for anything real to have this act of existence, the to-being of a thing. This ultimately elucidates what it means for God to be His own Act of Existing, the identity of His Essence and His Existence, and so forth. But maybe someone could put us back on the Truth track. (Just to be mischievous, here's a Thomist thought:truth is the corrsepondence of the knowing mind and the known, that is the existence of the real as objective form in the mind of the knower, making the mind open to being-all-things, or, as you say, John, understanding all things . . . .)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.