RE: Is evidentialism justified?
January 8, 2011 at 6:52 am
(This post was last modified: January 8, 2011 at 8:00 am by Edwardo Piet.)
Logic can't be wrong because if it's wrong it's illogical, and illogical=not logical=not logic.
It depends whether you believe logic itself has an existence.
I consider logic the totality of all logical things. Just as I consider "redness" the totality of all red things.
So that depends on how you define universals. You could say "Well, redness itself doesn't exist, there are merely things that are red, "redness" is always just a concept". And so you could say the same about logic.
If you consider redness and logic to have their own existence too (as in the totality of all red and logical things (I don't see how else you could reasonably be a universal realist)), then logic itself and redness itself are of course different to their concepts. Just like God himself - if he existed - would be different to the mere concept of God which we know exists.
The concept of "conceptualization" itself is of course different to conceptualization as it really exists and takes place in the mind!
Let us not confuse concepts with the realities of the matter, because that would be to make a Use/Mention distinction error:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%9...istinction
But the thing is, whether you believe logic itself to have an "existence" or not, a rock is still a rock whether anyone is around to conceptualize it or not. Things are by definitions always themselves and never not themselves, and this is logically absolutely the case and must be regardless of if humanity (or any intelligent alien life form) is around to conceptualize it or not.
Whether you consider logic to be worthy of the label of "existence" or not, the fact is, if logic doesn't exist, then, logically, logic doesn't exist - so if it doesn't exist it is logically true by definition that it doesn't exist regardless of whether anyone is around to conceptualize that or not.
I personally think that either logic doesn't exist at all OR.......it is the only thing that DOES exist. Existent things are logical things because anything that is illogical can't exist by definition.
I find it makes an interesting comparision with Time, in that atemporality can NEVER exist. Nothing outside time can ever exist because "ever" implies time. If atemporality can NEVER exist then how could it possibly exist?
Chuck Wrote:Can you determine whether the logic is good or not a priori? If not, then soundness and validity are mere notional concepts.
It depends whether you believe logic itself has an existence.
I consider logic the totality of all logical things. Just as I consider "redness" the totality of all red things.
So that depends on how you define universals. You could say "Well, redness itself doesn't exist, there are merely things that are red, "redness" is always just a concept". And so you could say the same about logic.
If you consider redness and logic to have their own existence too (as in the totality of all red and logical things (I don't see how else you could reasonably be a universal realist)), then logic itself and redness itself are of course different to their concepts. Just like God himself - if he existed - would be different to the mere concept of God which we know exists.
The concept of "conceptualization" itself is of course different to conceptualization as it really exists and takes place in the mind!
Let us not confuse concepts with the realities of the matter, because that would be to make a Use/Mention distinction error:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%9...istinction
But the thing is, whether you believe logic itself to have an "existence" or not, a rock is still a rock whether anyone is around to conceptualize it or not. Things are by definitions always themselves and never not themselves, and this is logically absolutely the case and must be regardless of if humanity (or any intelligent alien life form) is around to conceptualize it or not.
Whether you consider logic to be worthy of the label of "existence" or not, the fact is, if logic doesn't exist, then, logically, logic doesn't exist - so if it doesn't exist it is logically true by definition that it doesn't exist regardless of whether anyone is around to conceptualize that or not.
I personally think that either logic doesn't exist at all OR.......it is the only thing that DOES exist. Existent things are logical things because anything that is illogical can't exist by definition.
I find it makes an interesting comparision with Time, in that atemporality can NEVER exist. Nothing outside time can ever exist because "ever" implies time. If atemporality can NEVER exist then how could it possibly exist?
