RE: Logic vs Evidence
November 6, 2014 at 1:53 pm
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2014 at 2:26 pm by Simon Moon.)
(November 6, 2014 at 11:35 am)dimaniac Wrote: Can these things potentially contradict each other?
Logic is a formal method to detect if an argument is valid. But validity does not mean a thing without sound premises.
It is possible to create logical syllogisms that are valid, yet do not prove a thing.
1. All blue flerms come from the planet Blorn.
2. Joe is a blue flerm.
Conclusion - Joe comes from the planet Blorn.
This is a valid logical argument. Problem is, without sound premises, I proved nothing.
For a logic to be meaningful, it has to be fed with sound premises.
And do you know what constitutes sound premises? They have to be supported by....wait for it.... demonstrable evidence.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
