4 ms·
How can something so subjective as the quality and intent of writing be judged on whether it's "logically consistent" (which, even in a more appropriate context
by happytoexplain 6y ago
How can something so subjective as the quality and intent of writing be judged on whether it's "logically consistent" (which, even in a more appropriate context, is a uselessly low bar)? And "intelligent"? What does such a broad complement even refer to in this case?
- modzu 6y agoim not sure where to begin here.. but towards achieving an appreciation for logic, you might enjoy something that intersects with "mathematics", such as godel's "Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und verwandter Systeme". i also recommend reading bertrand russel's "on denoting". im quite curious to know if, once you've digested them, if you would change your comment. at the least, can you clarify if you truly meant "complement", or did you mean "compliment"?
- throwaway2245 6y agoIf you understand logic, at the level which you claim, then you should know that "logically consistent" has no correspondence with "correct". An "intelligent, logically consistent argument", as you say, can be plainly wrong or irrelevant. The underlying claim that "Asian" and "redhead" are exactly analogous seems dubious to me and I disagree with that, although I can agree that it is also unfortunate that the word "redhead" is banned by this filter.