Message from @Firefly

Discord ID: 322927385282347028


2017-06-10 02:27:51 UTC  

It depends. Are they using logic correctly, and are the premises sound?

2017-06-10 02:28:54 UTC  

It also depends. Logic used correctly, like in Hegel's case, is also a spook.

2017-06-10 02:29:34 UTC  

Hegel went so far away from reality people can't even understand his writings.

2017-06-10 02:30:14 UTC  

And the result of his writings is idealism, mistake and nonsense.

2017-06-10 02:30:25 UTC  

Hegel strayed too far from observations.

2017-06-10 02:30:51 UTC  

You are going billions of years from observations. Hegel did better.

2017-06-10 02:31:44 UTC  

I no longer need cosmology. Aquinas has arguments that work with an eternal universe.

2017-06-10 02:32:17 UTC  

All time is relative.

2017-06-10 02:32:24 UTC  

Arguments again.

2017-06-10 02:32:39 UTC  

You can make observations about the past.

2017-06-10 02:33:00 UTC  

Most people can't make observations of present.

2017-06-10 02:33:17 UTC  

Which means...?

2017-06-10 02:33:33 UTC  

Their logic is a spook.

2017-06-10 02:33:52 UTC  

Their data is a spook too.

2017-06-10 02:34:03 UTC  

But they usualy persist.

2017-06-10 02:34:19 UTC  

Not sure of the reason for that.

2017-06-10 02:34:48 UTC  

I would argue that their methodology is flawed. Who am I to say why people ignore contrary results?

2017-06-10 02:35:52 UTC  

It is possible to show why people get things wrong.

2017-06-10 02:36:59 UTC  

Irrationality is demonstrable.

2017-06-10 02:38:08 UTC  

The world is not completely rational. They are irrational too as part of the world.

2017-06-10 02:38:36 UTC  

Of course.

2017-06-10 02:39:06 UTC  

But if you can get far with reason, why jump off?

2017-06-10 02:41:04 UTC  

Logical arguments are abstractions, yes. Logic is an abstract system. It is not 'wrong'. The premises, though, can be wrong, which makes the conclusions also wrong. But if the premises are accurate, the conclusions will also be accurate.

2017-06-10 02:41:56 UTC  

As observations improve, so do the abstract conclusions.

2017-06-10 02:42:21 UTC  

Always improving.

2017-06-10 02:42:28 UTC  

So why jump off?

2017-06-10 02:42:36 UTC  

>But if the premises are accurate, the conclusions will also be accurate

2017-06-10 02:42:42 UTC  

That is not true

2017-06-10 02:42:55 UTC  

That was Hegels mistake

2017-06-10 02:43:50 UTC  

I mean they are accurate relative to observation.

2017-06-10 02:44:56 UTC  

Correct logic based on correct observation can be also wrong. Most of the time it was wrong in our history.

2017-06-10 02:46:56 UTC  

No observation is 100% accurate. But observations improve. Is that what you mean by they were wrong?

2017-06-10 02:47:12 UTC  

'Wrong' is not the correct word.

2017-06-10 02:48:09 UTC  

Correct logic based on correct observation may lead to the false conclusion and false prediction.

2017-06-10 02:49:06 UTC  

Wait, logic is not only about making predictions. Also, how can correct logic/premise lead to false conclusions?

2017-06-10 02:49:36 UTC  

Have to walk my wife out. Thank you for your time. I'll try to answer this later.

2017-06-10 02:49:44 UTC  

No worries.

2017-06-10 20:11:54 UTC  

@Deleted User Hey I wonder, are you Polish too or just likes his music?

2017-06-10 20:13:27 UTC  

What's up my fellow comrades

2017-06-10 20:18:05 UTC  

do yall hate jews