PDA

View Full Version : Logic


noel411
10-11-2005, 08:39 PM
This thread was sparked by the "i doubt anyone in gen chat would get this.. <showthread.php?t=10226> " thread. I think it's astounding the degree to which logic and common sense has gone amiss amongst so called "seekers of wisdom". The big problem with this being that without a grasp of the concept of logic, "knowledge" will get you nowhere. I'm not a regular visitor to these forums, but I have been an occasional browser for long enough to have picked up a reasonable overview of the sort of discussions that go on here, and the sort of people who frequent these places. Seems to me that a lot of people who post here get so caught up in their "knowledge" that they fail to acknowledge the basic principle of logic, which then leads to an inability to discern between fact and fiction.

The thread I referred to is a classic example of logic gone amiss.

Os3y3ris
10-11-2005, 11:59 PM
But plenty of people got that puzzle right.

7EL7
10-12-2005, 12:10 AM
This thread was sparked by the "i doubt anyone in gen chat would get this.. <showthread.php?t=10226> " thread. I think it's astounding the degree to which logic and common sense has gone amiss amongst so called "seekers of wisdom". The big problem with this being that without a grasp of the concept of logic, "knowledge" will get you nowhere. I'm not a regular visitor to these forums, but I have been an occasional browser for long enough to have picked up a reasonable overview of the sort of discussions that go on here, and the sort of people who frequent these places. Seems to me that a lot of people who post here get so caught up in their "knowledge" that they fail to acknowledge the basic principle of logic, which then leads to an inability to discern between fact and fiction.

The thread I referred to is a classic example of logic gone amiss.



oh shit you hit it right on the head

Os3y3ris
10-12-2005, 12:27 AM
I do agree though.

noel411
10-12-2005, 12:28 AM
But plenty of people got that puzzle rightIt's not about that thread, that's just an example. However, since you mention it, plenty of people also couldn't figure it out, and almost everybody at least struggled and seemed to think it was some sort of challenge, despite the fact it was the most simple of logical problems.

This thread is about the whole concept of logic itself though, and it's apparent lack of application by a lot of people who seek "knowledge". I personally see logic as the most important tool with which to learn, but sadly it also seems to be a largely overlooked aspect of furthering ones "knowledge" and understanding.

What good is reading about other peoples views, opinions, discoveries, portrayals, studies etc, if you don't have the capacity to approach it with your own uninhibited perspective?

To put it simply, I think a lot of people allow themselves to clutter their head with a whole lot of shit they don't even understand, while ignoring basic thought processes and techniques.

7EL7
10-12-2005, 12:30 AM
To put it simply, I think a lot of people allow themselves to clutter their head with a whole lot of shit they don't even understand, while ignoring basic thought processes and techniques.

alot of people have alot of problems


thats one

LHX
10-12-2005, 06:12 AM
the ability to retain information (ie - history - memorizing books - memorizing dates and names)
has nothing to do with intelligence

a substantial amount of evidence can be put forth to challenge any historical 'fact'


(a better stance would be to doubt everything that you read
unless you wrote it
and even then it may still be wise to doubt it)


good thread topic

Born Ruler I
10-12-2005, 08:01 AM
Logic is a left brain function. It negates intuition which is a right brain function. One can logically come to the wrong conclusion, but abstractly extrapolate the correct conclusion, and vice versa.

Both must be used.

One

Os3y3ris
10-12-2005, 11:23 AM
Logic does not conflict with intuition. People just use them wrong. I practice martial arts. Logically, I've got all of my techniques written down in a notebook somewhere. Where'd I put that anyways? Regardless, they're there. I already know what to do in every situation and thats as it should be. Someone tries to play, and in reality, they were beaten months ago when I wrote my game down. Thats on a logical basis. If player does X, I need to do Y. If to do Y, I need to Z. Therefore I'll do Z when he does X. However, I approach things from an intuitive angle at the same time, only not to the extent of being illogical. Logic and intuition are not equals in most situations, especially if one has REAL logic working for them. If I work on 100% logic in my game, I'll probably win at my current level. I'd be at a disadvantage, but I'd be alright. If I worked at 100% intuition, I'm gonna get assraped. I'm gonna get dealt with in all of 5 seconds. Now, where does intuition come in? On top of a logical base. Lets say I fuck up. Thats when I let my intuition get to work. The same moves that I've broken down logically all of a sudden start coming from odd angles without thought. New moves start popping up. My intuition has essentially been reprogrammed to draw upon a new vision in the back of my head. If it drew on my original vision, I'd lose 100% of the time.

Now, how can this be applied to the things we're discussing in KTL? Consider you're looking at race. Person A takes the bible literally and hold that as his worldview. Person B takes evolution. Person C is a Lamarckist. The question is, why are blacks black? Person A's intuition will tell him that they are obviously children of Ham. Person B will assume that the melanin is somehow useful. Person C will say that they got burnt and each generation inherited the dark skin. A truely logical look will prove at least two of these guys wrong. So consider now, that "intuition" is essentially a shortcut using one's worldview as a guide. Thats useful a good portion of the time, but after a point it gets ridiculous, especially the more extreme the worldview gets.

Born Ruler I
10-12-2005, 11:54 AM
I would argue the opposite.

Logic is what led invaders of Kemet to incorrectly conclude that they worshipped many gods. Their logical conclusion was based on their own Judeo-Christian and Islamic belief systems.

Logic based upon religious texts is NOT intuition, it is logic based on a certain foundation, even if it is erroneus.

Logic based on scientific experimentation results is more reliable, but intuition is usually what guides the scientists to experiment in the first place.

Logic and its systematic schemes is what led people to improper approaches to the 'rose petal' example. A more abstract, symbolic, intuitive approach- one seeing the allegory, which is a right brain function- worked better than any logical, formulaic approach.

The example of the 'rose petal' was not a logic exercise, it was a symbology exercise.

One

Born Ruler I
10-12-2005, 11:59 AM
But I definitely agree that they should work together.

One

Prince Rai
10-12-2005, 01:01 PM
id like to agree with the thread start.. definitely EVERYBODY makes the mistake to go on a quest, yet without understanding the whole concept in general. that is because humans are simply like that.


let me point out though as well... logic is a concept if not understood.. what makes an argument logical?

knowledge constitutes a valid thoughtful sentence, but it may seem unlogical to some.. and then to others seem absolutely god damn true.

that is why.. whatever is said... it must be questioned critically by ourselves.. therefore we create a logical picture of what has been said.

our logic is a benchmark to see the depths of a dropped degree of so called knwoledge!
but the benchmark changes too... therefore question ur selves as well..

peace n blesings

Prolifical ENG
10-12-2005, 03:33 PM
noel, I know what you are getting at....but dont know how you related this to that other thread.

What you have mentioned, there is a whole field of study related to it.

You are right in a way.....and some people will accept some things that some people will say....even on a public forum.

However, you chose the wrong words to use. If you noticed, the terms that you use are constantly being defined by the people using them in this forum. Using terms like "logic", "knowledge", and "intelligence" could mean different things depending on the context. Even in this thread examples are given.

I think what you mean by "logic" is simply people's ability to reason, for which theses are sound and which are fallicious instead of accepting everything said in a topic you know very little about. Not everyone can do this....if everyone could, the world's societies would be much different.

Sicka than aidZ
10-12-2005, 03:43 PM
who da masta?!? SHO-NUFF !

Sicka than aidZ
10-12-2005, 03:48 PM
thanks

noel411
10-12-2005, 05:28 PM
Some interesting replies in here. Prolifical, I wasn't so much talking about reasoning as I was about applying general principles of logic to thought processes, but certainly reasoning does play a large part in some of the things I mentioned, such as the ability to discern between fact and fiction.

And the reason I used that puzzle as an example of an excercise in logic is for the following reason. After reading the instructions on how to approach the puzzle, the first thing I would expect somebody to think is "where's the rose? where are the petals?", considering all you see is a bunch of squares and dots. I would think that the first logical step would be to figure out what represents the "rose", and what represents the "petals". Once you've done that, it's as simple as counting some dots. However, this is where people seemed to go wrong. Rather than simply just taking a look at what was there, people were talking about using complicated mathematical equations, and algebra and such, which I would personally consider to be a very ilogical approach. Roses, petals, dots, how does that lead someone to complicated mathematical equations?

Just my thoughts.

SubtleEnergies
10-12-2005, 05:32 PM
Yeah but in all fairness.....when you get a puzzle like the petals on the rose it could be ANYTHING. For all we knew it was mathematical.....everyone who figured it out taking different times....the amount of time it took just depended on which approach you went for first.

noel411
10-12-2005, 05:35 PM
Which is exactly my point. What I am suggesting is that the most logical approach is to first look at what's actually there, in which case you will quickly notice a very simple pattern.

SubtleEnergies
10-12-2005, 05:40 PM
Yeah but you're assuming your way of looking at it is the only way!

To me the most logical thing since it was dealing with numbers on a dice was to look for a numerical pattern. Had it been a numerical pattern then right now my way would have been the mosty logical and the other way a waste of time.

It depends on the person, no one can immediately know what the most logical approach is to every situation first go.

noel411
10-12-2005, 05:42 PM
I'm not trying to condemn people in here for their thought processes, just suggesting that some people may benefit from taking a step back from all their "knowledge" seeking, and go back to learning about basic ways in which the human mind (can?) function(s).

SubtleEnergies
10-12-2005, 05:44 PM
Yeah I know. I agree. I am just trying to point out that we all rely on trial and error and a bit of luck.

Like that Doctor who took a year....he has some issues...in a gap of a year he should have stopped and said to himself...hey my approach isn't working...let's switch it up...which is what I did after staring at it for like 10 minutes...

noel411
10-12-2005, 05:46 PM
Yeah but you're assuming your way of looking at it is the only way!

To me the most logical thing since it was dealing with numbers on a dice was to look for a numerical pattern. Had it been a numerical pattern then right now my way would have been the mosty logical and the other way a waste of time.

It depends on the person, no one can immediately know what the most logical approach is to every situation first go.Oh goodness no. I don't think my way is the only way. I didn't mean to come off like that. Lets say then that I personally feel that is the most logical approach.

You made a good point here. This is just something to think about. I don't mean to suggest that my way is the only way.

Prolifical ENG
10-12-2005, 05:58 PM
The way we know the sides of dice, they are symbols that represent numbers. If you really want to learn how the brain works before "knowledge is gained", symbolism is a very important part.

Thats what makes that puzzle a challange....the dots on dice never represent flowers in our own experiences with them....and almost everyone has used dice and had to take the sum many times. Since we are trained in seeing dice as numerical symbols, and take account as the title of the puzzle, its almost like trying to read what symbols are without anyones help.

Os3y3ris
10-12-2005, 08:33 PM
What the hell do they do with them out west?

Prolifical ENG
10-12-2005, 08:43 PM
What the hell do they do with them out west?

lmao.

I just said that referring to "the western world" as Im not up to par with what people in the world have never seen 6 sided dice with dots on them. I could have easily said "everyone in the world has seen dice" but that may not be true and I know people like to nitpick in this forum ;) so I failed anyway. }:|

tostones
10-12-2005, 09:13 PM
noel411,

The real question is what would happen if you asked a random group of people, totally unassociated with KTL, to take the puzzle test and then recorded their responses. I believe they would probably be similar to the ones in the KTL thread.
IMO,one would see its not just "knowledge" seekers, as you wrote it, that would run into problems in instantly solving the puzzle, and hints at a pesonal opinion about this section.

What exactly is the basic principle of logic, and does it address the controversy about its nature?
Which type of logic are you speaking of?
Is logic empirical?

What did you mean that an uninhibited perspective is logic? Isn't that objectiveness?

Also, you said that logic and common sense had gone amiss, when was it not amiss?

peace

Os3y3ris
10-12-2005, 09:20 PM
Whoops, there was a typo in my post. I meant to say "out of the west".

noel411
10-14-2005, 12:22 AM
The real question is what would happen if you asked a random group of people, totally unassociated with KTL, to take the puzzle test and then recorded their responses. I believe they would probably be similar to the ones in the KTL thread.
It would certainly be interesting to see. You might get the same result, or you might find that most people would just look at what's actually there, and solve it easily. We really can't say.
IMO,one would see its not just "knowledge" seekers, as you wrote it, that would run into problems in instantly solving the puzzle, and hints at a pesonal opinion about this section.Not quite sure what you meant by the last part of this. If you're saying that I am hinting at a personal opinion about this section, then you must have misunderstood me. I say with no hidden intentions that I think a lot of people here clutter their heads with too much shit, without applying simple thought techniques. That's just my opinion.
What exactly is the basic principle of logic, and does it address the controversy about its nature?
Which type of logic are you speaking of?
Is logic empirical?I'm not into this whole breaking down of a word and what is represents, thing. If you read my posts you will understand the context in which I am using the word.
What did you mean that an uninhibited perspective is logic? Isn't that objectiveness?I'm saying that if you look at something with an uninhibited perspective, then you can approach it from a logical point of view, rather than with a preconcieved basis of how you will or won't interpret it.
Also, you said that logic and common sense had gone amiss, when was it not amiss? That probably wasn't the best word to use. I more or less just meant that the principles of logic had not been applied.

Born Ruler I
10-14-2005, 08:42 AM
It remains, though, that it is symbology, which is a right brain, abstract thought process- not a left brain, linear logical function.

One

noel411
10-14-2005, 09:16 AM
That's cool. I understand that. I explained my perspective of why I think logic plays a large part in it too though. Man I wish my memory was better. I read a good book on how the brain operates, which covered left and right brain functions, not that long ago. But I've forgotten pretty much everything the fucken thing said, haha. Pity too, because I actually found it highly interesting.

Oh, and I forgot to comment on...
The way we know the sides of dice, they are symbols that represent numbers. If you really want to learn how the brain works before "knowledge is gained", symbolism is a very important part.

Thats what makes that puzzle a challange....the dots on dice never represent flowers in our own experiences with them....and almost everyone has used dice and had to take the sum many times. Since we are trained in seeing dice as numerical symbols, and take account as the title of the puzzle, its almost like trying to read what symbols are without anyones help. Good point.

I do see that what you guys suggest about symbolisism is fitting. Symbolism is an avenue I have personally not explored in great detail, so it is interesting for me to hear your thoughts on its use in that puzzle.

M.I.C Diesel
10-14-2005, 09:41 AM
Just to add on, I grabbed up my Yahtzee dice & set that puzzle to my 2 sons. One who is 4 & One who is 7.. The youngest one just kept counting all the numbers up & trying to run off with them!!!! The older one called me crazy & laughed after saying, Dice don't have petals Daddy, before looking at me like Arnold in Different Strokes!!After explaining that the dice are representative of roses, they did not figure it out, yet my older son has a faultless understanding of maths for his age..

tostones
10-14-2005, 08:33 PM
It would certainly be interesting to see. You might get the same result, or you might find that most people would just look at what's actually there, and solve it easily. We really can't say.
Which is why one would not be able to somehow correlate posted results here with the type of topics discussed, with any degree of certainty. Going from remarks on the puzzle's website, it seems most took a couple minutes, some saw it instantly, and a sizeable amount became frustrated or had problems. But again, I would say no proof either way, and cant ignore confounding factors.

Not quite sure what you meant by the last part of this. If you're saying that I am hinting at a personal opinion about this section, then you must have misunderstood me. I say with no hidden intentions that I think a lot of people here clutter their heads with too much shit, without applying simple thought techniques. That's just my opinion.

I understood that. Of course, what you wrote is an opinion. You stated that you've watched KTL off and on, but apparently at least from what I've read, made little to no posts attempting to illuminate fellow members on topics that possibly are a bit more important than an internet puzzle game. I'm saying your inference was probably more connected to past opinions.


I'm not into this whole breaking down of a word and what is represents, thing. If you read my posts you will understand the context in which I am using the word.
A shame, thought it might be something positive to add. Not necessarily breaking down a word, but adding on about concepts you seem to care about. I was specifically interested in logic and how it related to my recent logos thread. Also, logic is typically associated with philosophy, and within that field it is recognized that there are many different "types". I have read your posts, and while I have an idea of which type you write about, its not completely clear and thus the argument isn't either in a more formal sense. It could be said that certain types of logic were indeed applied and thus people were more prone to have problems.

paz

Prince Rai
10-15-2005, 05:45 AM
http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e01.htm

let me just guide u to this site i found on logic...

i still gta get through these topics..

but its worth a read

peace n blesingz

Ronin
10-15-2005, 09:24 AM
personally i think logic changes with diff people and their learning experiences

i have a strong sence of logic for my environment, but put me in a situation where im unsure of my bearings and my logic will fail most likely

i do agree some people here have shitty logic, theyd rather just beleive what bullshit speakers like malachi york have to say

LHX
10-15-2005, 10:29 AM
logic is how the language / symbol / communication part of the brain works

it is possible to set up logical traps for yourself all the way to heaven

Ronin
10-15-2005, 01:16 PM
lol yeah, its illogical that u go to a magic land in the clkouds when u die, but when its programmed into you....thats when u start beleiving

noel411
10-16-2005, 12:20 AM
Which is why one would not be able to somehow correlate posted results here with the type of topics discussed, with any degree of certainty. I'm not trying to pretend there is any degree of certainty in the link between the two. I'm more or less just suggesting that people here should consider taking a moment to explore the principles of logic.
. You stated that you've watched KTL off and on, but apparently at least from what I've read, made little to no posts attempting to illuminate fellow members on topics that possibly are a bit more important than an internet puzzle game. I'm saying your inference was probably more connected to past opinions. I said openly that this thread was based on my observations of this place over time, and therefore past opinions. The puzzle and its outcome merely sparked me to do this thread.

As for not posting in other threads, I really don't read many (and before you say that I shouldn't make assumptions about the discussions here, and people who participate in them, if I read so little in here, remember I already said this was based on casually browsing these places over some time), and almost never read any in their entirity. Very few, in fact almost no, topics on these forums are of any interest to me, so I almost never have anything I wish to add to them.
A shame, thought it might be something positive to add. Not necessarily breaking down a word, but adding on about concepts you seem to care about. I was specifically interested in logic and how it related to my recent logos thread. Also, logic is typically associated with philosophy, and within that field it is recognized that there are many different "types". I have read your posts, and while I have an idea of which type you write about, its not completely clear and thus the argument isn't either in a more formal sense. It could be said that certain types of logic were indeed applied and thus people were more prone to have problems. Ok. Well I'm basically refering to logic as common sense and basic reasoning. The ability to see something for what it actually is, rather than leading oneself astray for reasons such as preconcieved interpretations, over-analysing etc.

7EL7
10-16-2005, 01:02 AM
Hey noel

do you eat pancakes ?

tostones
10-16-2005, 06:41 PM
noel411,


I'm not trying to pretend there is any degree of certainty in the link between the two. I'm more or less just suggesting that people here should consider taking a moment to explore the principles of logic. Ok. I guess I was misled when you wrote that this thread was "sparked" by it. Also, that "the thread I referred to is a classic example of logic gone amiss".


I said openly that this thread was based on my observations of this place over time, and therefore past opinions. The puzzle and its outcome merely sparked me to do this thread.

As for not posting in other threads, I really don't read many (and before you say that I shouldn't make assumptions about the discussions here, and people who participate in them, if I read so little in here, remember I already said this was based on casually browsing these places over some time), and almost never read any in their entirity. Very few, in fact almost no, topics on these forums are of any interest to me, so I almost never have anything I wish to add to them.
In all honesty, then why bother now?
And how is what you describe above a "reasonable overview"?

its ironic that you are against preconceived interpretations leading one astray from reason.

peace

noel411
10-16-2005, 07:33 PM
Tostones, to be honest I really don't see this discussion going anywhere, nor do I see either of us benefitting from it. I respect your opinion and attempt to argue my points, but I really don't care to invest any more time in this discussion, which right now has dwindled down to pointless corrections and so forth. This is another reason I very rarely get involved in discussions here.

Peace

tostones
10-16-2005, 08:18 PM
A shame. One of the reasons I question your "logic", is that many threads in KTL ,IMO, help see through illusion, and thus function as a sort of opposite to your personal explanation of logic. If you ever want to truly build on the nature of logic, feel free to contact me.

peace