Logic
(→Reason and rhetoric) |
Rationalizer (Talk | contribs) m (Reverted edits by 217.188.242.103 (talk) to last revision by Tmtoulouse) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
The classic example philosophy students like to play with is the "Socrates is mortal" proof. | The classic example philosophy students like to play with is the "Socrates is mortal" proof. | ||
| − | + | ==Reason and rhetoric== | |
| + | Rarely are arguments outside of formal logic classes presented in a way that can be readily abstracted. This is usually because a formalized rendition makes for poor natural language, and often would require stating many things considered "[[a priori|obvious]]". The dangers become when [[logical fallacy|logical fallacies]] sneak their way in, disguised by the way natural languages are conjugated and expressed, and when the "obvious" assumptions that are only implied or taken for granted are themselves false, or at least debatable. | ||
| + | |||
| + | When ''good'' arguments are assembled into high-quality rhetorical speech, they form robust and even brilliant presentations. When [[bullshit|poor arguments]] are disguised by translation into rhetoric, they can lead many people astray. | ||
==Using what logic teaches== | ==Using what logic teaches== | ||
Revision as of 22:01, 23 April 2011
| Part of the series on
Logic and rhetoric |
| Key articles |
| General logic |
| Bad logic |
Logic is the formal study, and use, of the interrelationship between statements in order to determine whether arguments yield useful results or are bullshit.
Contents |
Formal logic
In formal logic, any natural language used in an argument is reduced to abstract symbolism, with the results looking pretty much like equations in algebra or set theory. This abstraction allows the clear and concise analysis of the content of the argument.
A simple example would be the syllogism, which at a formal level is read like this:
- A implies B - We know that if A is true, then B is also true.
- A - A is true.
- B - Therefore, B is true. [1]
The classic example philosophy students like to play with is the "Socrates is mortal" proof.
Reason and rhetoric
Rarely are arguments outside of formal logic classes presented in a way that can be readily abstracted. This is usually because a formalized rendition makes for poor natural language, and often would require stating many things considered "obvious". The dangers become when logical fallacies sneak their way in, disguised by the way natural languages are conjugated and expressed, and when the "obvious" assumptions that are only implied or taken for granted are themselves false, or at least debatable.
When good arguments are assembled into high-quality rhetorical speech, they form robust and even brilliant presentations. When poor arguments are disguised by translation into rhetoric, they can lead many people astray.
Using what logic teaches
While it is often difficult to directly analyze arguments using formal techniques, it is worth the effort to at least try from time to time. This effort has the double reward of clarifying or refuting well or poorly constructed arguments, and reminding one how to construct a good argument oneself. A high quality argument could literally be footnoted or deconstructed in an appendix, expressing every element it contains at a formal level.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ The original author was too lazy to do battle with LaTeX to properly show the purely symbolic version of this example.