I CAN THINK OF A FACT THAT DOESN’T RELY ON PRIOR SENSE EXPERIENCE: IF A IMPLIES B AND B IMPLIES C, THEN A IMPLIES C. THIS IS TRUE REGARDLESS OF PHYSICAL REALITY.
Very Good, thank you. I really appreciate it. Please enjoy the following discussion of this logic. It is actually quite interesting.
The word imply, in its etymology: _”to involve *something unstated* as a logical consequence” first recorded c. 1400; that of “to hint at” is from 1580s._ (Source: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=imply)
If something is unstated then it hasn’t been said, nothing has been said. Nothing doesn’t exist! Is it possible that the fact you present as not relying on prior sense experience is … nothing i.e. not a fact?
Logical statements are only as powerful as they are specific. Your logic is fine but it is about *something unstated* i.e. nothing certain. Thus it illustrates the necessity of reality based specifics in saying things with clarity and certainty.
In other words the more abstract and detached from reality one’s logic becomes, the less it really says. In order to give a fact that doesn’t rely on prior sense experience you presented … something unstated i.e. nothing? think about it.
As far as mental training and learning goes it can serve some purpose but the reality is that as thinking gets more out of touch with reality the more useless, the more empty of substance, it becomes.
This is because base meaning is derived from reality.
You might perhaps make the wording a little bit better as follows.
If a implies b and for the same reason b implies c then a implies c. But the word “implies” is weak/uncertain it is just an *”unstated something”* and without knowing why it is implied one cannot weigh the substance, weigh the reasoning or the strength of the connection
SENSE EXPERIENCE SURE HELPS WITH FIGURING THIS OUT, BUT IT’S NOT NECESSARY.
Oh, yes! Mathematical thinking is very powerful and useful but if it loses touch with reality and how reality functions it has become debased and will give debased results.
*Got to have true facts and reasoning in accord with reality or thinking cannot come to true conclusions for real use.*
What’s a fact? How do we get them? Accurate sense of reality is the *prime/original* source of facts. (true and false ‘facts’) There is no other foundational source.
IF A BRAIN IN A JAR CAME UP WITH THE CONCEPTS OF TRUTH, OF MULTIPLE SEPARATE THINGS EXISTING, AND OF IMPLICATION THEN IT COULD REACH THIS SAME CONCLUSION.
Our brains are in our heads.
I suggest you never base discussion or reason on such obviously false premises/axioms. That a whole lot of other people do is no excuse for it. Note, you proposed an imaginary base, I stated the facts of the matter and rejected the imaginary. You can’t just pick any basis/axioms and talk from there and be really/factually correct, it is impossible.
I DISAGREE THAT THE PRIME FUNDAMENTAL IS REALITY. I’M ASSUMING YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT AXIOMS HERE. YOU CAN JUST PICK ANY AXIOMS YOU LIKE AND DRAW CONCLUSIONS FROM THEM USING LOGIC. THEN YOU CAN MAKE THE STATEMENT “THIS CONCLUSION IS TRUE IF YOU ASSUME THESE AXIOMS.”, AND THE STATEMENT WILL ALWAYS BE TRUE REGARDLESS OF PHYSICAL REALITY.
If you want to do this, you can but you will be seen for what you are i.e. someone using anything to base a ‘true’ statement.
Truth is conformity to reality. So not true to reality axioms are mere false foundations that can never be used to arrive at truth based conclusions.
We live in and as part of reality.
Facts of reality must be known, accepted and used in thinking to draw optimal conclusions.
Some may like to come up with axioms why my chainsaw should work after taking the spark plug out, but in reality all such axioms are rubbish. You seem sensible enough in reality to me, so just keep a reality base to your thinking and living and the confidence of fact based thinking and doing will keep you in good standing.
LOOK, I DO MATHS FOR FUN, I STUDY COMPUTER SCIENCE, I DID A UNI COURSE ON LOGIC AND I WAS TOP OF THE CLASS. I LIKE TO THINK I KNOW WHAT I’M TALKING ABOUT HERE.
John Taylor Gatto, was twice New York State teacher of the year. He went to a Jesuit school for a while because he won a scholarship due to photographic memory. His class teacher/priest went over why a world war happened and asked if anyone knew how the world war came about. He put up his hand and parroted back what the teacher had said. The teacher then explained how it was all incorrect and that Mr Gatto, didn’t know what he was talking about, he only thought he did as he hadn’t found out enough real facts and weighed them and come to a real understanding.
Real knowledge as basis for real logic and good conclusions is far more difficult than most realise. History is full of lies. What we’re taught in schools is like the black and white of Mary’s Room.
When we get into the real world, eventually most find the knowledge we think we know doesn’t correspond to much in reality – and so after the prime learning years were largely wasted in schools, we have to start learning for real, and unlearning the non-sense we were fed.
We are told ‘facts’ that are not facts and if we use these in logical thinking, we will think we are definitely correct, (even top of the class, congratulations by the way) but like a religious believer with false facts, our calculations/reasoning about how to live a proper life can be completely wrong, WHILE we think they are unquestionably right.
_The philosophical deceptions that created religion are no longer in the religious genre BUT *the ‘religious sense’ generated by philosophical deceptions today, is more prevalent than EVER.*_
I MIGHT NOT BE INTIMATELY FAMILIAR WITH PHILOSOPHY, BUT I KNOW HOW AXIOMS WORK. I JUST DON’T KNOW IF I’M EXPLAINING MY VIEW VERY WELL. OR MAYBE I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN.
That teacher, Mr Gatto, told me and many others that to ‘part the veil’ and learn what society really is we should read some philosophical works that those in elite schools often do. I took his advice and it was spot on. The one sentence summary is that society is based on much philosophical deception, it’s very disturbing and cognitively crippling deception.
ANYWAY, IF YOU WANNA AGREE TO DISAGREE THAT’S ALRIGHT WITH ME.
I HOPE I HAVEN’T CAUSED YOU TOO MUCH TROUBLE. Not your fault.
SINCERELY, THANKS FOR TAKING THE TIME TO TALK TO ME, AND I HOPE YOU HAVE A GREAT DAY AFTER THIS.
Each individual can only think as they currently do. For example, you can’t just change what you think is a right way to think and see things. A genuine coming to a different view will be necessary for such change.
Real, core or foundational changes in thinking are usually very difficult.
They take time, consideration of different views/facts and most importantly a knowledge that reality is the source of factual truth and it is primarily known through the senses.
I never finished reading Hobbs Leviathan, it was deeply disturbing to my socially indoctrinated thinking. It honestly shows the brutality of how society is made and managed. As did all the other philosophical works. Hobbs was probably the most honest and clear of them all.
I lived in a fairy tale story of what society was until I was about 45. I hope you don’t find out that late in life.
I encourage you to read and interact on discussions like this one. It has much conversation that is above the generally very low level on YT. Keep some records/files of interactions and really listen to those that disagree with you WHILE providing evidence/reasons.
I never did learn much from all those that agreed with me but they did reinforce the narrowness of my mental radius. And sorry my responses are so long.