Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Laws of Logic Cannot Be Human Constructs

26 views
Skip to first unread message

Calvin Ramsey

unread,
Oct 15, 2012, 12:53:26 PM10/15/12
to
If the laws of logic are human constructs then how can they be absolute
since humans think differently and often contradictorily? If they are
produced from human minds, and human minds are mutually contradictory,
then how can the constructs be absolute? Therefore, the laws of logic
are not human constructs.

Freedom Man

unread,
Oct 15, 2012, 12:55:26 PM10/15/12
to
"Calvin Ramsey" <calvin...@live.com> wrote in message
news:k5hf26$98t$1...@dont-email.me...
Correct, they are scientific facts as are the laws of physics.


Syd M.

unread,
Oct 15, 2012, 10:21:53 PM10/15/12
to
So what?

Dakota

unread,
Oct 15, 2012, 11:13:32 PM10/15/12
to
Let's look at this logically.

Premise 1:
The laws of logic are produced by human minds

Premise 2:
Human minds are mutually contradictory.

Conclusion:
Therefore the laws of logic cannot be absolute.
-------
The conclusion fails because premise 2 is gibberish.

Syd Maniac

unread,
Oct 16, 2012, 2:07:45 AM10/16/12
to

Dakota

unread,
Oct 16, 2012, 3:13:28 AM10/16/12
to
On 10/16/2012 1:07 AM, Syd Maniac wrote:
> Dakota wrote:
>
>> On 10/15/2012 9:21 PM, Syd M. wrote:
>>> On Oct 15, 12:53 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> If the laws of logic are human constructs then how can they be absolute
>>>> since humans think differently and often contradictorily? If they are
>>>> produced from human minds, and human minds are mutually contradictory,
>>>> then how can the constructs be absolute? Therefore, the laws of logic
>>>> are not human constructs.
>>>
>>> So what?
>>>
>> Let's look at this logically.
>>
>> Premise 1:
>> The laws of logic are produced by human minds
>>
>> Premise 2:
>> Human minds are mutually contradictory.
>>
>> Conclusion:
>> Therefore the laws of logic cannot be absolute.
>> -------
>> The conclusion fails because premise 2 is gibberish.
>
> I think you are thinking about this far more then Ramsey did.
>
He tends to favor gibberish and ignore everything else.

Christopher A. Lee

unread,
Oct 16, 2012, 4:04:46 AM10/16/12
to
On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:07:45 +0000 (UTC), Syd Maniac
<pauldav...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Dakota wrote:
>
>> On 10/15/2012 9:21 PM, Syd M. wrote:
>>> On Oct 15, 12:53 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> If the laws of logic are human constructs then how can they be absolute
>>>> since humans think differently and often contradictorily? If they are
>>>> produced from human minds, and human minds are mutually contradictory,
>>>> then how can the constructs be absolute? Therefore, the laws of logic
>>>> are not human constructs.
>>>
>>> So what?
>>>
>> Let's look at this logically.
>>
>> Premise 1:
>> The laws of logic are produced by human minds
>>
>> Premise 2:
>> Human minds are mutually contradictory.
>>
>> Conclusion:
>> Therefore the laws of logic cannot be absolute.
>> -------
>> The conclusion fails because premise 2 is gibberish.
>
>I think you are thinking about this far more then Ramsey did.

Ramsey? Think?

WangoTango

unread,
Oct 16, 2012, 1:18:33 PM10/16/12
to
In article <k5hf26$98t$1...@dont-email.me>, calvin...@live.com says...
> If the laws of logic are human constructs
>
They aren't.
They just "are", and it doesn't take a deity to make them so.

I can imagine an object that isn't what it is.

Seth lePod

unread,
Oct 16, 2012, 11:11:19 PM10/16/12
to
On Oct 15, 9:53 am, Calvin Ramsey <calvinlram...@live.com> wrote:
> If thelaws of logicare human constructs then how can they be absolute
> since humans think differently and often contradictorily?  If they are
> produced from human minds, and human minds are mutually contradictory,
> then how can the constructs be absolute?  Therefore, thelaws of logic
> are not human constructs.

:
So your claim is that these "Laws of Logic" are true?

Prove it:





Seth
0 new messages