3 ms·
I think logic is fairly neutral when it comes to truth. It's just a method for organising axioms. Whether the logical system you choose actually favours truth o
by hetman 8y ago
I think logic is fairly neutral when it comes to truth. It's just a method for organising axioms. Whether the logical system you choose actually favours truth or not, really depends on the axioms you choose. Further more, even with the right axioms you still have the problem of imperfect decidability because in practice we have imperfect observations of all the relevant data, and non-infinite computational power to examine all the relevant permutations of that data.
Now I'm not saying logic isn't useful for seeking truth; with a lot of care applied to the choice of axioms and examination of the data it can still be very helpful in weeding out untruths.
The problem is a lot of these debates are permeated by rhetoric which is more interested in some predetermined conclusion than seeking truth. Even subtle tweaks to a good logical approach can get you out into the weeds very quickly.
- naasking 8y agoBut when comparing against reality, there's very likely a shortest logical description. That what makes logic assymetric as the OP said.
- brain5ide 8y agoDefine length of a logical desciption. Number of statements? Number of axiomatic categories involved? The categories being agreed on? That's all quite shaky IMO.
- szemet 8y agoHere it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_description_length Literally unusable in real world arguments though ;)
- naasking 8y agoAnd don't forget Solomonoff Induction, which builds a total order over hypotheses using Kolmogorov complexity.
- bpchaps 8y ago"Very likely".. So are you agreeing that some things don't have a "shortest logical description"? That leaves a lot to interpretation ;).