(January 26, 2010 at 6:24 pm)Synackaon Wrote: Interesting - so you want me to use the framework of logic, that which is developed to differentiate between patterns of thoughts and ideas to connote the correctness of a statement within context to prove if said framework is appropriate for evaluating things?
Ok, first off, you are getting negative repped for that jack-off of a statement. I thought there was a misunderstanding, but now I can see that you are merely wasting my time by pulling every trick you can think of. I am now expecting you to ask if we can prove reality is reality in some useless post-modernist masturbatory blatherfest because you cannot seem to accept that faith in a deity is baseless despite all definitions and examinations of it using critical thought.
Second, I am not going to waste my time proving logic is logical for evaluating what it was designed for. It is blatantly moronic, like asking if a generic hammer is good for the act of hammering a generic nail through a generic board of wood. A rigorous philosophy of science course at a reputable research university is suited for your questions upon the nature of logic - seriously, go ask these questions to someone who devotes their profession to answering these types of questions.
If you cannot prove logic with some evidence outside of logic itself, then it seems to me that you must take it on faith (if faith is taken as belief without evidence). If I am wrong, please tell me where I went wrong.
