Jazzn makes a distinction between "reason" and "logic."
So I suppose we can call reason "informal logic" and what he's referring to as "formal logic." Not being versed in formal logic, I can't speak of it.
But I and everyone else knows what I mean when I speak of "informal logic" or Reason. The question is whether the sort of reasoning I habitually employ has any validity, and if not, why not? Here's a sample:
Brute or Blackguard
I am well aware that there are some puzzles in the above argument, but one does what one can. This is a sample of what I call "informal logic."
My reasoning is the reasoning of people in general, not of someone who specializes in "logic." What makes it seem so important to me is that I think of it as a handle on reality. If this handle is broken, then I am out of touch with reality. This is why I reacted so strongly to the idea that I "don't understand logic." If I don't understand logic, then I am living in a mad maze. I have no handle on reality. Informal logic has to have some validity in order for the handle to be real.
Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
