Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Formal and Informal Logic
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 61 of 191 (329322)
07-06-2006 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by PurpleYouko
07-06-2006 10:38 AM


Re: cool
We've been through all this before and given those premises it is the only logical conclusion.
I think we arrived at the conlusion that no free will meant you are a machine and would arrive at pre-determined conclusions. If you called them logical that would in no way inform us as to whether the conclusion was logical or not. You would say what you had to say as a machine. And thats all.
You never escaped from the circle of pointing to yourself as a freely concluding machine who couldn't freely conclude anything.
IIRC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 10:38 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:32 AM iano has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 62 of 191 (329323)
07-06-2006 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by iano
07-06-2006 11:25 AM


Re: cool
I think we arrived at the conlusion that no free will meant you are a machine and would arrive at pre-determined conclusions. If you called them logical that would in no way inform us as to whether the conclusion was logical or not. You would say what you had to say as a machine. And thats all.
Yes agreed. That pretty much defines no free will.
You never escaped from the circle of pointing to yourself as a freely concluding machine who couldn't freely conclude anything.
Except that I was never in that circle since I never claimed to be freely concluding in any way shape or form. You just couldn't seem to accept that what I was saying is exactly what you have defined above.
As a machine I have no choice but to do what I do. however as I have no pre-knowledge of what I will do, I have the illusion that it is otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:25 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:34 AM PurpleYouko has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 63 of 191 (329325)
07-06-2006 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by PurpleYouko
07-06-2006 11:32 AM


Re: cool
So when you say 'logical conclusion' we have no reason at all to believe you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:32 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:38 AM iano has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 64 of 191 (329328)
07-06-2006 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by iano
07-06-2006 11:34 AM


Re: cool
So when you say 'logical conclusion' we have no reason at all to believe you.
Good point. I missed that in your definition.
I guess that in the complete absence of free will then logic is really meaningless too since all we would be doing is following a set program of unchangable events.
In the absense of logic as a valid concept you would have no reason to believe anything.
Edited by PurpleYouko, : Corrected spelling mistakes

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:34 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:47 AM PurpleYouko has replied
 Message 69 by ramoss, posted 07-07-2006 9:26 AM PurpleYouko has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 65 of 191 (329332)
07-06-2006 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by PurpleYouko
07-06-2006 11:38 AM


Re: cool
In the absense of logic as a valid concept you would have no reason to believe anything.
Exactly. You couldn't even believe you had free will or no free will. End of fruitful discussion.
Bye

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:38 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:56 AM iano has not replied
 Message 70 by ramoss, posted 07-07-2006 9:27 AM iano has not replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 66 of 191 (329340)
07-06-2006 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by iano
07-06-2006 11:47 AM


Re: cool
Exactly. You couldn't even believe you had free will or no free will. End of fruitful discussion.
As usual you jump to the wrong conclusion.
The whole point is that you can't tell the difference. unless you can show me a method to test for free will this is simply an exercise in (possibly illusionary, if no free will) logic.
Just because in the context of exploring a logical outcome of certain fixed premises, you reach a point which seems to make no sense or is contradictory in some way is no reason to abandon the course of the logic.
There are plenty of logical paths that lead to dead ends when based on fixed criteria. All it means is that you need to re-examine the premises and try again with slightly different starting data.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:47 AM iano has not replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 67 of 191 (329514)
07-07-2006 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by PurpleYouko
07-06-2006 10:38 AM


Re: cool
sorry
i meant by my stated questions that you could have free will and god exsist at the same time .... as you defining god does have a problem with the exsistance of free will ... this that statement that as god is all powerful and has no limits he can grant you free will , while still retaining his unlimited powers and vision .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 10:38 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-07-2006 8:59 AM ikabod has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 68 of 191 (329555)
07-07-2006 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by ikabod
07-07-2006 3:51 AM


Re: cool
No problems.
The point is that this is a thread specifically about applying formal logic and following it through to it's conclusions as opposed to applying "common sense" (or informal logic)
When the premises are clearly defined, it is possible to follow a course of logical deduction in a formal way and by doing so, only one possible answer can be reached.
this that statement that as god is all powerful and has no limits he can grant you free will , while still retaining his unlimited powers and vision .
You are free to believe this if you like but the statement does not follow formal logic as it can be shown to be logically inconsistant.
The train of formal logic says that if it is possible for any being or artifact to know ALL time infallibly then that time cannot be changed from the course it is already known to take. Therefore no free will.
This is not an implied weakness of God but simply a statement of the nature of the Universe. Any Universe in which foreknowledge is possible has to follow a fixed path throgh time as any deviation from that path would render the foreknowledge incorrect.
Logically, in order for God to grant us free will he would have to create a Universe in which the future is in genuine flux. (I'm sure that would be well within his power.) But by doing so he must make it impossible for the future to be known by anyone, including himself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by ikabod, posted 07-07-2006 3:51 AM ikabod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by ikabod, posted 07-07-2006 9:40 AM PurpleYouko has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 69 of 191 (329563)
07-07-2006 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by PurpleYouko
07-06-2006 11:38 AM


Re: cool
Except of course, you are predermined to accept the instructions known that have been predetermined justified as logic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-06-2006 11:38 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-07-2006 9:34 AM ramoss has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 70 of 191 (329564)
07-07-2006 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by iano
07-06-2006 11:47 AM


Re: cool
On the contrary, part of the pre-determined belief is the belief in free will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by iano, posted 07-06-2006 11:47 AM iano has not replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 71 of 191 (329568)
07-07-2006 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by ramoss
07-07-2006 9:26 AM


Re: cool
Except of course, you are predermined to accept the instructions known that have been predetermined justified as logic.
Quite possible, assuming that the person performing the logical deduction is actually inside the system.
As we are only performing an exercise in logic, it could well be assumed that the person performing the logic could be entirely outside of the given system. Let's say that person is God for example.
Then again, if the premises are wrong then we have no problem. Our free will is genuine so our logic is no longer pre-determined.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by ramoss, posted 07-07-2006 9:26 AM ramoss has not replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 72 of 191 (329572)
07-07-2006 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by PurpleYouko
07-07-2006 8:59 AM


Re: cool

Off Topic - DO NOT RESPOND


i understand logic constrants , but can your logic cope with the idea of a god who caan step back a see the whole of time as one picture , a single frame so to speak ,
thus he can see you at time = 1 thinking about option a or b ,
he can see you at time = 10 making a free will choice between a and b
and he can see you at time =100 experiencing the effects of the choice .
from gods point of view all three time points are similtanious there is no past present or future but a view of everything , god see the whole universe including all time points of said universe .
The train of formal logic says that if it is possible for any being or artifact to know ALL time infallibly then that time cannot be changed from the course it is already known to take. Therefore no free will.
does this logic not also mean god has no free will , as god cannot change time as he has effects on things subject to time , then god is part of the time flow .??
can you use formal logic to show an possible expersion of free will , that thus shows the future is not fixed ??
Edited by AdminNWR, : off topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-07-2006 8:59 AM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-07-2006 9:55 AM ikabod has not replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 73 of 191 (329577)
07-07-2006 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by ikabod
07-07-2006 9:40 AM


Re: cool

Off Topic - DO NOT RESPOND

thus he can see you at time = 1 thinking about option a or b ,
he can see you at time = 10 making a free will choice between a and b
and he can see you at time =100 experiencing the effects of the choice .
This is the entire crux of the argument that invalidates free will.
The point is that God CAN look at all time. He is able to see the very first insant of time and the very last instant and all instants in between.
To use your example, He sees me at time = 10 making a "free" choice then at time = 100 experiencing the effects of that "free" choice. Then how about he looks at time 10 again, and again and again. Am I ever going to make a different choice?
It's a bit like watching the replay of the Englan Vs Portugal World cup match. No matter how many times I watch it, Portugal are still going to win on penalties.
To somebody outside of time, watching all time simultaneously, who also KNOWS every choice we are ever going to make, it is like watching a giant still shot with everything fixed in place. Every instant in time is fixed.
from gods point of view all three time points are similtanious there is no past present or future but a view of everything , god see the whole universe including all time points of said universe .
Exactly so how can it be anything other that what it IS? Free choice implies that it is changable.
does this logic not also mean god has no free will
not at all since God created time and remains outside it. The logic implies that TIME is fixed, not God. he can recreate it to be different whenever he wants to.
can you use formal logic to show an possible expersion of free will , that thus shows the future is not fixed ??
I cannot see any way to show any kind of logical consistency between it being possible for God or anybody else to know all time, and the existence of free will.
To know it, it must be fixed.
If it can change unpredictably (ie. by a free choice) then it isn't knowable.
Edited by AdminNWR, : off topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by ikabod, posted 07-07-2006 9:40 AM ikabod has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 191 (329578)
07-07-2006 9:58 AM


Topic warning
Caution. Please recheck the OP. This is not a topic about free will.


Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by ikabod, posted 07-07-2006 11:09 AM AdminNWR has not replied
 Message 76 by PurpleYouko, posted 07-07-2006 1:13 PM AdminNWR has not replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4493 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 75 of 191 (329593)
07-07-2006 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by AdminNWR
07-07-2006 9:58 AM


Re: Topic warning
sorry did not mean to stay off topic , i was trying to see how and if the use of formal logic could apply to things that do not seem commanly logical . i was using free will as a test subject to have the disipline of logic applied to it . clear needs a different topic . again sorry .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by AdminNWR, posted 07-07-2006 9:58 AM AdminNWR has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024