What is the opposite of logic?

As a pragmatist I would say the meaning of single word depends of the context its used and is refering to. In this context I was refering to obviousness nature of assuming something being obvious and self explanatory as faith. Same aplies to any word that has polysemic meaning. If we dont accept poeple can use word with specific meaning depending on context, then we have contradicted the value that it has meaning at all. Same like I accept causality can be understood differently, but when it comes to my ideas it is same as change, measure, direction, quantity itself and in mind its has knowledge, ignorance relation that changes the mind states as well as the moods. When I said logic has causality itself, I meant that "Mind can change" it can be affected with knowledge and situations, so as rational thinkers when we ask "Why this person has changed?" We ask what caused it. I think its self explanatory at this point. When it comes to logic itself, its more property of mind that has ability to change, and see the change, as well as being able to be affected by inward or outward toughts and things. That is something causality is when I mean that it is causal.
 
This thread is an absolute train wreck lol
 
Deleted member 16771 said:
This is the interview. I would have to watch it through to find a timestamp, but it's during a part of the interview where Russell is talking about his first introductions to logic by his brother, so early on I think.
Click to expand...
Oooh Russell! I love Russell. Thank you for sharing. :hearteyes:

jkxx said:
Awww c'mon guys :D
Click to expand...
Just some teasing among friends. :wink:
 
Lady Jolanda said:
Oooh Russell! I love Russell. Thank you for sharing. :hearteyes:
Click to expand...

Bertraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand :hearteyes: Funny Bertrand quote of the day:

"So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence; and in this respect ministers of religion follow gospel authority more closely than in some others."

I'll keep this away from the religion thread, I don't want just me to see it. :bigsmile:
 
Puzzlenuzzle said:
The opposite is: me after few drinks.. drunk texting my ex.
That gives me a few days< worth of self-cringe and cursing that nobody has made a time machine.
Click to expand...

But if astrology is the opposite of logic, and logic is the opposite of drunk texting exes, then astrology = drunk texting exes?

:thinkinghard:
 
Ren said:
But if astrology is the opposite of logic, and logic is the opposite of drunk texting exes, then astrology = drunk texting exes?

:thinkinghard:
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Ren said:
But if astrology is the opposite of logic, and logic is the opposite of drunk texting exes, then astrology = drunk texting exes?

:thinkinghard:
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


This is how I see it...

Rationalising astrology: Some planets placed in specific sections of your charts dictate yadayadayada. I mean, our logic needs to make sense and align with our reality? But what if someone really beliefs in it and unconsciously plays it out by following what some guru said on youtube about mercury retrograde. It's not rationalised thinking though but maybe fearful rationalised approach. Like, I dislike astrology - I think its simply put very excrusiatingly annoying and I'm the first to escape if a guy asks me what sign I'm in :D However, during my darkest times I have sometimes read it because it gave me some kind of false security.

Rationalising drunk texting: 1 tequila, 2 tequila, text! Somewhere along the lines I thought of him and instead of being rational about it and think "nah,, nothing good is going to come out of this. I mean, I just said I'm having pizza for breakfast". No no, Instead of following that wise guy in my head, I think "b-b-but what iiiif??" And, I go on a mission about "what if" and haven't played out how the conversation might be in my head :D Then, autocorrect comes into it and instead of just backing off and leaving that one mistyped text then, no... I argue with autocorrect.
 
jkxx said:
I'm going to let this one slide, because everyone seems to have so much fun with it. But I am not comfortable with it. Just an fyi, and point taken.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I assume you're referring to astrology and if you are then sorry. I can not speak for you nor judge you for what you belief in or what you hold close, I can only refer to my experience. However, my friend likes Astrology and I think that is great as she has a more healthy 'relationship' with it then I did. so, if that's what you believe in and it puts a smile on your face then continue doing that.
 
Last edited:
jkxx said:
My definition - opposite of logic = random access memory

ok time to jet
Click to expand...

Erick said:
Intuition?
Click to expand...

Ren said:
That’s a pretty good one actually. Though to me, it is more easily opposed to reason/rationality than to logic. Another possibility - related to intuition - would be: instinct.
Click to expand...

I have been thinking about this for a few days before reading this yesterday afternoon, and I have come to thoughts similar to those quoted.
I guess it may be necessary to put this thread back on track as well.

At first I thought of "association" as the opposite to logic, because associations are subjective to each individual. It differs from memory in that it doesn't need access to actual memories to work, even if it depends on memories and experiences to exist/having been made. But associations may just as well connect to concepts rather than memories. But I digress. The way that associations are made aren't necessarily comprehensible through logic, but it may still be logically conceivable to the individual making these associations, and therefore, if logic can be applied to it, it isn't outside if its realm.

My second idea was "intuition", which is similar to association, only a lot more vague in both description and in the way it works. I think there are several kinds of intuition, some closer to association, or even "instinct", but those are both logically conceivable concepts. Intuition, however, is more of a feeling than an actual manifestation of something explainable. I feel it defies logic naturally, by knowing neither beginning of the notion that intuition gave, nor does it hold any truth value in the moment that it is felt.
 
Ginny said:
I have been thinking about this for a few days before reading this yesterday afternoon, and I have come to thoughts similar to those quoted.
I guess it may be necessary to put this thread back on track as well.

At first I thought of "association" as the opposite to logic, because associations are subjective to each individual. It differs from memory in that it doesn't need access to actual memories to work, even if it depends on memories and experiences to exist/having been made. But associations may just as well connect to concepts rather than memories. But I digress. The way that associations are made aren't necessarily comprehensible through logic, but it may still be logically conceivable to the individual making these associations, and therefore, if logic can be applied to it, it isn't outside if its realm.

My second idea was "intuition", which is similar to association, only a lot more vague in both description and in the way it works. I think there are several kinds of intuition, some closer to association, or even "instinct", but those are both logically conceivable concepts. Intuition, however, is more of a feeling than an actual manifestation of something explainable. I feel it defies logic naturally, by knowing neither beginning of the notion that intuition gave, nor does it hold any truth value in the moment that it is felt.
Click to expand...

This is great! I think you're onto something here!! At least it's much better than my suggestion of drunk texting :)
I personally agree with the first one. You got me curious though and I agree that intuition defies logic naturally. I mean, on paper its black and white but when applied it isn't necessarily. Could you give me examples of several types of intuition? as you see it :)
 
Puzzlenuzzle said:
This is great! I think you're onto something here!! At least it's much better than my suggestion of drunk texting :)
I personally agree with the first one. You got me curious though and I agree that intuition defies logic naturally. I mean, on paper its black and white but when applied it isn't necessarily. Could you give me examples of several types of intuition? as you see it :)
Click to expand...
I don't know if there are several "types" of intuition, but there are a number of ways to think of it. You could always look at it from the side of the intuitive functions, Ni and Ne (Ne probably resembling "association" more closely - I would say any function could do it though). But there is always the gut-feeling someone has, be it moral or ethical in nature, or a feeling of empathy. The latter would fall into the category of emotional intuition, but it is not the only thing that it does. An empath with emotional intuition can feel when someone is lying. This is just an example. Still, this sort of thing cannot be understood logically, unless someone were schooled in decyphering body language and speech patterns. Some people are naturals at this sort of thing, and they cannot explain their knowledge because to them it's simply something they feel or know suddenly.
 
Ginny said:
I don't know if there are several "types" of intuition, but there are a number of ways to think of it. You could always look at it from the side of the intuitive functions, Ni and Ne (Ne probably resembling "association" more closely - I would say any function could do it though). But there is always the gut-feeling someone has, be it moral or ethical in nature, or a feeling of empathy. The latter would fall into the category of emotional intuition, but it is not the only thing that it does. An empath with emotional intuition can feel when someone is lying. This is just an example. Still, this sort of thing cannot be understood logically, unless someone were schooled in decyphering body language and speech patterns. Some people are naturals at this sort of thing, and they cannot explain their knowledge because to them it's simply something they feel or know suddenly.
Click to expand...

I get you. Its really difficult to explain to some why someone is lying or not being honest with themselves.
Once though, I read about some volunteers picking their favourite art. But, later when they were asked why they picked it. Explaining it logically and making a standpoint was difficult. They just blabbered something to justify why they picked it. So, the bottom line of if was that we most of the time don't know why we dis/like what we dis/like.
 
Puzzlenuzzle said:
So, the bottom line of if was that we most of the time don't know why we dis/like what we dis/like.
Click to expand...
That is actually an easy one to answer. Most of it has to do with how we are brought up, or how we were educated. How big that percentage is, I couldn't say, but most of the time there are rational explanations for dis/liking of things (to assume your depiction), hidden deep in our psyche. To come back to your example, there are also pieces of art that are designed to instill a specific feeling in the observer. So there is a kind of influence on both ends. This is also to be found in literature (especially in works with a lot of suspense - it's what I wrote my first paper on :) ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top