Quote:
Originally Posted by mattityahu
I seem to be missing something here; I don't see where objectivity of knowledge comes into the objectivity of logic itself - as dglas says logic has no bearing on whether a particular proposition accurately reflects reality or not. Or are you not talking about logic itself?
Could you possibly roughly outline the argument so I could see the bigger picture? The language is so sticky in this area, and a bit more context might be helpful in clarifying things.
|
Ok, please bear with me as I go through a convoluted explanation of why I'm dealing with what may seem like two different topics as one.
Logic is a collection of systems dealing with inter-relationships. It is used in life as a method for clarifying knowledge; all the knowledge is there in the premises, but it is not clarified till we make it clear using logical methods.
As such, when dealing with the natural world, then the objectivity, or impartiality if you will, of logic can be a very pressing issue. B.H. has on the Hub mooted that logic may be subjective; it's part of my goal here to show that that is not the case, that logic is indeed "objective" --- meaning impartial, and wholly independent of human perception and interpretation. It exists in the natural world in its own right, independent of humans.
And thusly, while taking dglas' comments into account, the matter of truth propositions, truth itself, and what is true (a bit seperate from "truth"), will all come into play.
More much later, my absolute apologies, but right at the moment I am coding, coding, coding.