"To Defy Logic" was said. Can we define logic, or do we actually have reds lines we won't cross?

[just me]

Most everyone, as their time comes, uses logic in specific situations. We may even, each of us, not see something the same way. So I ask, "Whose logic?"

Logic and understanding, through logical thinking, does not mean we all see things the same. In reality, or in "what is real", we still have to make decisions: each of us having our own reasons, causing our actions to move in different directions. Some may even decide to not act and just watch.

Can a watching person act through different channels: channels possibly unseen and unspoken about by the majority of people? One thing I know, everyone has different opinions.

Can our world function properly if everyone thinks aloud? If everyone has their say? I think not.

The past is something gone away, and all it was was yesterday. What will become of yesterday? Are there not writings on the walls of yesterday? Just as most of us think about tomorrow (the future of things in the present), we look into yesterday (the past of things in the present).

Things regarding sending persons to their own country to be tried and held by the powers of their own country: these things could become a test of our laws and powers. However, we are using laws that govern the United States and the people of the United States. I would like to see an understanding between our own powers. If different avenues must be created, I would like to see new avenues that will stand the test of time.

The handling of some people can be very dangerous. The faster it is done, the more secure it is. The least said, the easier it will remain. Place in the news, if need be, only after it is completed. A lot of our people could be risking their lives even more than they are. Any attempt to stop and/or publicize causes problems we do not need. Please work things out.

 

[aeon]

In good spirit...

Best,
Ian

 

[just me]

Liked the beat to that song, but the feeling is gone. I must play it again: add a new riff to it. Maybe just try to play along.

It did make me think of articles of incorporation, for some reason.

 

[Reason]

Everyone is at least somewhat compromised in their logic. All that remains for us to do is decide whether we should try to overcome our rationalizations.

If we decide to do so we can become the wisest and best version of ourselves. If we decide otherwise that everyone has a bias and therefore no effort needs be expended to check ourselves then we will fall into delusions.

 

[John K]

The past is something gone away, and all it was was yesterday. What will become of yesterday? Are there not writings on the walls of yesterday? Just as most of us think about tomorrow (the future of things in the present), we look into yesterday (the past of things in the present).

Mostly it's not the logic that goes wrong, but the places people start from, the assumptions we make, which we choose as a given. Choose different starting points and the logic takes you in different directions.

The scope is something else we take as a given. For example, none of us would be here now if a guy about 3,500 years ago hadn't given up his birthright for a bowl of soup (see Genesis), because the history of the world would have been totally different. It's sobering to realise that any one of us might be making a decision today that unbeknown to ourselves has a similar impact on the world 3,500 years in our future. But we very rarely make our logic in such a context as that - it's normally got a scope of 5 minutes to ten years into the future.