Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (66191)	12/12/2004 3:47:39 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

Pulling out the dictionary, dictionary.reference.com you are right. Logic is a bunch of words used to describe a web of causal relationships, or expected causal relationships in the case of hypothetical situations. To me, if the premises of the chain of logic are false, then it's just a bunch of words. It's like role playing in sales training. I never liked that at all, because it's silly. It's silly because it's not real. Fortunately, it was only inflicted on me once [or maybe twice]. The idea was that sales is a verbal games process rather than a human to human iterative process leading to a change in how things are done. I suppose people can study logic by role-playing using all blue dogs, but it seems odd to me. I prefer conjectural logic based on reality. But I take your point. < If we all agreed about a specific fact, and that "fact" was actually false, it doesn't mean that logic couldn't be appliedto that fact, merely that logic correctly applied might not result in a true conclusion.> It does seem that a nice turn of phrase, combined with a long-enough chain of logic, each step not quite true, leads people to very wrong conclusions, even if the initial premises are almost true. The verbal process has a seductive way about it. <Do you believe that there is no reality outside conscious perception of it? > Personally, that seems to be true. But logically, it doesn't seem to be. I suppose that comes into the "don't know" category. But consciousness does seem to be the rider of the four forces of the apocalypse [which has a logical ring to it] and I quite like the idea. I think I'll give up now and have a nice cup of tea and read the newspaper! I'm getting bewildered. Mqurice