Does logic matter if it doesn't change the way I live?

[Tom Lane]

Hey hold on there just a minute. First of all, have you been speaking with Bocete? Secondly does Gorn know about this? I mean we haven't even been properly introduced. Then there is the ring. Does it have to be a diamond? And what about the kids? How can we ever agree on what religion we are not going to bring them up in? And lastly but most important, who gets control of the remote?
Okay here is another analogy for you. I am happily married to the same woman for 34 years. I am more madly in love with her than i ever have been. We are totally open with each other about who we are and what we are thinking. I know she is my soulmate and the the best thing that ever happened to me.
Gorn doesn't believe in marriage. (poor Gorn how did he get dragged into this?) He says I can't prove that I love my wife and that I would be just as happy without her or maybe happier. After all, he says I am a good man and I would be a good man without her too. Why should I have to tied down to just one woman who has so much power over me? There are plenty of other great women. How do I know I wouldn't be just as happy with one or all of them? Not tied down to any one woman.
I tell Gorn that yes I can't prove that I love my wife and I can't even prove that love is anything more than a biological response. But I also tell Gorn that I was with a lot of other women before I met my wife and none of them captured my heart like she did. I tell him that it would not be logical for me to turn my back on my wife that means so much to me, even If I can't prove that I love her. Besides I couldn't do it anyway.

Okay, I think I get your analogy. Just using your analogy, it sounds like you and this fictional Gorn agree, logically, rationally, but you love your wife (not Gorn) anyway and don't want to stop. Fictional Gorn might point out that what you're feeling is brain chemistry and he'd be right and you'd agree but that doesn't matter to you.

I think you said that your wife and your love for her are good for you, they make you happy, and you think you're better with your wife than without. As long as that's true, then I don't see any problem.

If that were not true, and instead, your wife is a compulsive gambler and you spend your weekends robbing banks to pay her debts, then, even that's not illogical if that's how you want to live your life and you're okay with your likely death by cop. It's only illogical if you claim that you want to live your life without hurting others too.

So, then, back to the original question "does logic matter if it doesn't change the way I live?" I think the answer is yes and no. Yes, logic still matters and it's frequently wise to use it when you make decisions, and even in this case, it's probably smart to recognize the facts, but for this decision, the logic doesn't matter to you. You just like Jeeps. It's a preference.

The next analogy has to use pepper!

 

[Bocete]

Okay, I went to art school and we were taught to embrace contradictions. Dadaism is all about contradictions. Sometimes combining contradicting symbolism in unrealistic scenarios is the best way to visually illustrate a complex idea. Seriously, try drawing "potential" in a way that people instantly understand. It's hard. Those guys that do those business editorial illustration for in-flight magazines are geniuses.

I think you might be confusing contrast and contradictions. Maybe not?

Let me put this example to you. My sister has a pit bull. Some people say pit bulls scary vicious dangerous dogs and I say they're right. My sister says pit bulls are very affectionate and gentle. I also say she's right. I don't have a problem holding both those conflicting thought in my head. What's your take on it? I guess you could say it's situational.

Pretty much all pit bulls are both gentle and vicious at different times, by different amounts and at different people. Truths are rarely black and white. Expecting them to be black and white is illogical.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

I think you might be confusing contrast and contradictions. Maybe not?

Maybe. An example of a dada contradiction would be a light bulb with a candle in it. How would you light the candle? Or a mop with a power cord. It's manual and it's automatic. And you'd electrocute yourself if you put it in water.

Pretty much all pit bulls are both gentle and vicious at different times, by different amounts and at different people. Truths are rarely black and white. Expecting them to be black and white is illogical.

Total agree. I wanted to hear the take of someone who's into logic. There was no right or wrong answer to my question.

I always liked the Orwell quote about doublethink from 1984. "To know and not to know, ... to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, ... to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, ... The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed."

I know he meant it in a bad way but I'll tell you why I like that. In my job in advertising and design I need to quickly come up with a lot of options for a client with completely different strategies. It's not like on Mad Men where Don Draper gives them one perfect idea, take it or leave it. I can't think black and white like there is only one solution to any given problem. I need to be flexible and strategic. I have to give them many strategies that are all logically sound. But each one might be polar opposite to the next. When the client picks an idea, I have to forget all the others and commit to that one like it's the truth. But the real truth is that any one of them would accomplish their goals. So that's why I've had to develop the skill of excepting contradictions.

 

[Bocete]

I don't think these are contraditions. That's where we disagree. I like tomatoes and I also like pepper. I really don't have a problem with this, looking from a perspective of logic.

These examples are outside the domain of applicable logic. The fact that these domains exist in no way invalidates logic, nor should be used as an example of how logic doesn't work.

On the other hand, sometimes things that seem illogical are very logical. I would put the Jeep story as an excellent example of logically acknowledging the illogical. He took his irrational desires, weighted them against cons of getting such a vehicle, and deducted that he should get it. He should logically get it. I agree with this and consider it to be rational.

I think I'm genuinely unclear on what is and what isn't within the domain of logic. The thing is, I don't know. I will think about it more. But personal taste definitely isn't, and rationally acknowledging our irrationality seems to be.

 

[slobake]

 

[48thStreetCustom]

I think I'm genuinely unclear on what is and what isn't within the domain of logic. The thing is, I don't know. I will think about it more. But personal taste definitely isn't, and rationally acknowledging our irrationality seems to be.

Well that's an interesting take on it.

 

[Bocete]

I don't have a problem with that. I know what kind of person I find attractive. I don't have to explain why, I cannot, and so what. I can still logically, rationally decide to look for such a person, knowing full well that I will probably be happier that way.

 

[Funky Ghost]

So my gal has had the flu for 4 days straight and was feeling pretty down in the dumps about her appearance and what-not. Typical gal I showed her my post from yesterday.

You know the Disney teary eyes? Just real big and watery?
No sound, nothing but a watery look...

It was the logical thing to do.

 

[BassyBill]

I don't know of anyone who ever came to any sadness or harm because they were too logical.

 

[Munjibunga]

Maybe worrying is giving deserved thought to a vexing issue - a kind of safety feature. Eventually you'll stop worrying about whatever it is, but the worrying made you think through it.

 

[MAJOR METAL]

I'm still considering going through with it http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Kolinahr

 

[BazzTard]

I think that all wrong-thinking people are right !!

 

[Funky Ghost]

Two wrong don't make a right, but 3 lefts do.

 

[slobake]

Back to the title of the thread. If we use logic to determine our best choice and still make another choice then understanding logic is not much use. Sometimes we know what the logical choice is and we do something different because we don't like the logical choice or for some reason we are not capable of making that choice.

 

[Bocete]

Back to the title of the thread. If we use logic to determine our best choice and still make another choice then understanding logic is not much use. Sometimes we know what the logical choice is and we do something different because we don't like the logical choice or for some reason we are not capable of making that choice.

It's like saying that you could use a hammer to hammer a nail, but instead you decided to take a rock and throw it in the river, hoping that this will somehow put the nail in it's place. This is not the hammer's fault, nor is the hammer useless if you don't use it.

Logic is a tool, and is an integral part of the toolkit we use to find out what is true. It's not merely a part of it, it ties all the other tools we have into a cohesive and usable whole. Knowingly doing stuff in spite of logic (that is, when logic is applicable and points the other way) is wrong and alarming. It does happen to all of us, but it's not merely ok, and it in no way invalidates logic or makes it useless.

Or maybe I'm not reading what you said there.

 

[INTP]

Back to the title of the thread. If we use logic to determine our best choice and still make another choice then understanding logic is not much use. Sometimes we know what the logical choice is and we do something different because we don't like the logical choice or for some reason we are not capable of making that choice.

So....if you don't use logic, it isn't much use.

 

[slobake]

It's like saying that you could use a hammer to hammer a nail, but instead you decided to take a rock and throw it in the river, hoping that this will somehow put the nail in it's place. This is not the hammer's fault, nor is the hammer useless if you don't use it.

Logic is a tool, and is an integral part of the toolkit we use to find out what is true. It's not merely a part of it, it ties all the other tools we have into a cohesive and usable whole. Knowingly doing stuff in spite of logic (that is, when logic is applicable and points the other way) is wrong and alarming. It does happen to all of us, but it's not merely ok, and it in no way invalidates logic or makes it useless.

Or maybe I'm not reading what you said there.

No sir, I am not trying to invalidate the value of logic, sorry if I have been unclear on that. More that knowing something and acting on it are two different things. Having knowledge and understanding is good but it doesn't help us if we ignore it.
I know we all do that sometimes, life can throw tough choices at us and we don't always make the best choices. At least, I don't.

 

[Bocete]

So....if you don't use logic, it isn't much use.

I don't think that was the question. It was specifically about using logic and deciding to do otherwise. Having all the information, thinking about it, coming to a sound conclusion, and doing otherwise.

EDIT (after Slo's post above):

Even ignored advice is useful. When we consider something and reject it or choose otherwise, this has helped us make an informed decision in a way. We know where we stand and why we did something, or why we didn't proceed otherwise.

I care very much about 'why', just as much as 'what'. The why part is the only way to make sure what we did was the right call. A good feeling about 'what' only takes us so far.

Did this respond to your question better, Slo?

I'll just note that I talked about 'advice', not logic. Logic, when applicable and strongly pointing towards an answer, is pointing to the only right answer. Sometimes we are to weak to follow it, but even then, we made an informed decision and knew right from wrong. This is not useless.

Expecting us to do the right thing at all times is simply not realistic. We all fail to do that. But I personally feel bad when that happens, I regret it, and this regret makes me a better person and try harder next time. Or so I hope. This regret wouldn't have been there had I not thought it through logically.

 

[slobake]

So....if you don't use logic, it isn't much use.

Yes that is what I am trying to say. Of course logic can be useful even if we ignore it. At least that way we know that we may be making a wrong choice.
My original intention was to point out that we all do things sometimes that are not logical and that we should think about that before we say someone else in not logical to discredit them.

 

[Bocete]

Yes that is what I am trying to say. Of course logic can be useful even if we ignore it. At least that way we know that we may be making a wrong choice.
My original intention was to point out that we all do things sometimes that are not logical and that we should think about that before we say someone else in not logical to discredit them.

I agree. How did you sum up my whole post in that one sentence?

Discrediting someone for being illogical is rarely productive. Sometimes certain people that affect policy or our immediate livelihood need to be called out, and I don't think you would oppose that.

Pointing out that someone is being illogical when they're providing a poor logical justification for what they did is.. murky. I look at that as being helpful, but understand that it could be hurtful and thread very lightly.

Pointing out that someone is being illogical when they knowingly did something illogical (what I think you're talking about) is completely missing the point. This criticism would make no sense.