3 ms·
Formal logic can help to reveal unstated assumptions in reasoning. But disputes about these unstated assumptions, which often involve abstract ethical or metaph
by jasonhansel 8y ago
Formal logic can help to reveal unstated assumptions in reasoning. But disputes about these unstated assumptions, which often involve abstract ethical or metaphysical claims, can themselves be even more intractable.
- AndrewKemendo 8y agoIn fact this is exactly where formal debates between intellectuals often wind up - on debating fundamental concepts in philosophy or science. Any debate that has hope of progressing the state of argumentation about [topic] will include agreements on definitions and fundamental premises so they don't get bogged down there.
- dnautics 8y agoIf only. A lot of intellectuals were trained in argumentation but not formal logic. The number of times I see `a => b` be equated to `b => a` is mind-rending, and that's not even getting into issues of causality. A while back someone who stayed himself an intellectual posted a contrapositive of a statement as if it were a brilliant insight.
- jasonhansel 8y agoI'm not sure that getting "bogged down" by such questions is always a bad thing. Often these fundamental issues are, ultimately, the most important.
- Kialo 8y agoAgreed. It seems that the single biggest divider are epistemological systems and the ways people choose which to adhere to. That's a debate which I couldn't convince anyone to start yet.
- AndrewKemendo 8y agoI'll have that debate. I can't seem to find anyone to get into that either. My proposal: You write a Medium post with your argument, I'll respond with my rebuttal/response on Medium. That's how the old guys did it, except with letters.