RE: Is the statement "Claims demand evidence" always true?
January 17, 2017 at 11:44 am
(This post was last modified: January 17, 2017 at 11:57 am by The Grand Nudger.)
In the exceedingly specific way that I've been using the term truth, yeah, it'd be a conflation. I think it's useful to separate what is true from what is accurate for precisely that reason. We can possess an accurate conclusion without that conclusion being a product of logical processes. Similarly, the operation of a computational architecture might conform to the rules of boolean algebra but -not- the rules of propositional logic.
I would be very, very surprised to find that our minds conformed to the rules of propositional logic, the standard of truth, whereas I would not be suprised to find that our minds conformed to the standards of machine logic...which are exceedingly capable of providing accuracy. The two might dovetail nicely around any given "what", but it would be a mistake to draw inferences or analogies about the one as though they uniformly extended to the other. They do not.
Wish they were, though, then we wouldn't need to wonder about anything, we could build a legitimate truth machine, lol. A calculator could provide us with the answers to the deepest questions of life. Unfortunately, that the operation of a gate yields a value of true has nothing to say in regards to truth as I use the term. It just means "on". So to any pattern extracted by an nn, however accurate, is just -on- in a vacuum. Hence the value of evidence in propositional logic, a way to generate sound propositions, rather than propositions-by-default.
I would be very, very surprised to find that our minds conformed to the rules of propositional logic, the standard of truth, whereas I would not be suprised to find that our minds conformed to the standards of machine logic...which are exceedingly capable of providing accuracy. The two might dovetail nicely around any given "what", but it would be a mistake to draw inferences or analogies about the one as though they uniformly extended to the other. They do not.
Wish they were, though, then we wouldn't need to wonder about anything, we could build a legitimate truth machine, lol. A calculator could provide us with the answers to the deepest questions of life. Unfortunately, that the operation of a gate yields a value of true has nothing to say in regards to truth as I use the term. It just means "on". So to any pattern extracted by an nn, however accurate, is just -on- in a vacuum. Hence the value of evidence in propositional logic, a way to generate sound propositions, rather than propositions-by-default.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
