Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Once the notion of objective truth is relinquished, what ontological or epistemic status remains for reasoning itself? Is it to be understood as a pragmatic construct, or as something with deeper necessity beyond empiricism?


Deep necessity, we follow logic so we are not grunting beasts.


But where does logic exist in, then? Does it not need consistency to be useful? And what causes the consistency? It's turtles all the way down.


Logic does not exist in a physical sense, but try to think without it. For example, try to think without the law of noncontradiction. Can you categorize?


I tried quite a lot. I've come to the conclusion that thinking (and logic) is probably some pattern that only seems interesting to itself.

(Yes, I am aware of the otherwise nonsensical concepts "pattern" and "interesting".)


My instantiation of logic isn't physicalized? Is there unphysicallized logic?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: