tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post3982513555510274027..comments2023-05-25T13:17:24.082+00:00Comments on Language, Life and Logic: How we ought to thinkMark Englishhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03506844097173520312noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-60401954831929911462012-07-15T03:08:07.225+00:002012-07-15T03:08:07.225+00:00I'd certainly go along with a lot of what Merc...I'd certainly go along with a lot of what Mercier says here, though I think he might be over-generalizing. And the way he presents that example of the big roach-shaped chocolate versus the small heart-shaped one doesn't make any sense to me. Why wouldn't you prefer the large, expensive roach-shaped one??Mark Englishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03506844097173520312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-41747486449092329602012-07-15T00:47:40.892+00:002012-07-15T00:47:40.892+00:00Some interesting stuff here:
https://sites.google...Some interesting stuff here:<br /><br />https://sites.google.com/site/hugomercier/theargumentativetheoryofreasoningAlanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16898681927233029900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-21537004658692090742012-07-12T03:12:41.529+00:002012-07-12T03:12:41.529+00:00Implicature (!!!) I love that (!!!)
Ignites my fas...Implicature (!!!) I love that (!!!)<br />Ignites my fascinature (!!!)GTChristiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14390368105725901371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-72866516692669250892012-07-11T14:27:35.345+00:002012-07-11T14:27:35.345+00:00It's as though these patterns of thought are h...It's as though these patterns of thought are hard-wired into the brain and work well enough on actual, concrete problems but when you make it abstract, intuitions fail.Mark Englishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03506844097173520312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-85804510348681733932012-07-11T13:04:27.629+00:002012-07-11T13:04:27.629+00:00I agree. Simple words, even logical operators, do ...I agree. Simple words, even logical operators, do often have multiple meanings. And there's no easy way around this.<br /><br />I'm curious about conditionals. Every five year old can follow modus ponens, and we all use it automatically. But it's very hard to teach modus tollens persuasively. Why so? I imagine we also use MT almost automatically.Alanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16898681927233029900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-45468005739001468852012-07-11T04:48:13.016+00:002012-07-11T04:48:13.016+00:00Wittgenstein is certainly at one extreme and then ...Wittgenstein is certainly at one extreme and then you have various kinds and degrees of linguistic revisionism. But someone committed to formal logic need not necessarily have a negative or 'reformist' attitude to ordinary language. <br /><br />My focus here was on the fundamental logical operations (like conjunction, disjunction, etc.) and what justifies them and what they mean. Critical thinking is about complex, real-world reasoning, and so takes us beyond the fundamental building-blocks.<br /><br />Take the 'conjunction fallacy' (Daniel Kahneman's 'Linda problem'). It seems to me that the problem arises because an 'and' in an English sentence is not a logical '&'. There's a lot going on in ordinary language which formal logic blocks out. (I am thinking of what is studied by linguists under the name pragmatics and Grice's notion of 'implicature'.)Mark Englishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03506844097173520312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7021972615680221295.post-59823386429447919822012-07-10T23:33:17.347+00:002012-07-10T23:33:17.347+00:00I do agree that "the attempt to create formal...I do agree that "the attempt to create formal systems which can do what natural language can do has led to a renewed appreciation of the complexity, power, elegance and logical depth of the latter".<br /><br />As I see it, there are three parties here: Frege (pure formal logic), Wittgenstein (ordinary language and leaving the world as it is), and Dewey (critical thinking). Dewey wrote a book called "How to Think" which put CT into the frame. Mill also preached a CT message.<br /><br />I suspect that CT needs to be taught. It doesn't come naturally, even if kids have the basic concepts built in. This is the theme of Kahneman's recent work, judging from reviews I've seen.<br /><br />The Bluffer's Guide -- there's a book I would like to have written.Alanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16898681927233029900noreply@blogger.com