Can decisions be made using logic alone?

[Paradoxum]

Is it rational for God to choose a benign universe if He has the power? Is morality related to logic, or are the two independent?

Morality is related to objectivity, but I'm not sure if that means it is logical too. I'm not exactly sure what it means to be logical.

Is it possible to be raitonal about issues involving value, such that given the facts one can conclude that the better option is worth persuing. To me this seems to be a logical truth (true by definition), if some option has more value (or is "better") then it is more worthy of persuit enough said. But is it rational to persue what is worth persuing, or do we have to abandon reason and move on to first principles somewhere along the line? Axiom: persue the worthy - by axiomatising avoid an infinite regress or circular loop of ratiocination, or what? It seems like this modality is existentially forced upon as a basic demand, like it or not, the question being whether we can discern the worthy and achieve it. It is part of the nature of human experience and perhaps therefore beyond logic and reason, which is a response to it - maybe? Thoughts?

I think we need to start with some assumptions. To make any actions or decision one must start with some value. For example, being that is only logical cannot choose to eat food to survive because such a thing requires that one dislikes the feeling of hunger or hopes to carry on living. To know what is to be valued we need to start with basic values.

 

[WonderBeat]

Personally, I do not see where rationality figures into "choice" at all.

There is no such thing as a rational "decision."

When it comes to the definition of rational, certain things are rational in certain contexts.

A mathematical proof may be rational, because all its steps are consistent with certain axioms we take to be self-evident, and lead to a conclusion.

Human beings are considered to be rational, but really we should say we are intelligent. Rationality and intelligence are thus wedded.

Now, certain decisions may seem rational because they are more beneficial, and hence appear to be the more intelligent option. But what if the person does not care about benefits? What if he chooses because, on an existential level, he feels he has the right to choose? Where does "rationality" fit in? What makes one decision (picking flowers) any more rational than another decision (exacting revenge against a family member).

Applying the term rational here is meaningless.

 

[jpcedotal]

you mean without prejudices? Moral decisions made by a single person without prejudices?

I think not

 

[WonderBeat]

you mean without prejudices? Moral decisions made by a single person without prejudices?

I think not

Were you responding to me? Elaborate.

 

[jpcedotal]

Were you responding to me? Elaborate.

I wasn't specifically responding to your post more of an in general statement. One's upbringing and personal experiences play a really big role in our personal decision making.

What one might see as logical, another will see as a prejudice.

 

[Gracchus]

Some decisions can be made using logic alone. Is 2 + 2 = 2 X 2? Some decisions can be made using logic and preference. Should I walk or drive to the store? If I drive, I save time, and if I walk, I save money. Thus by consulting preference and using logic, I can make a decision. Some decisions are strictly preference. What flavor of ice cream should I buy?

Now of course you might prefer that 2 + 2 = 2 X 3! You could "choose" to believe that. It would not be logical. It is hard to see what advantage would accrue to you from such a decision. some might think it really, really stupid.

You could to be a whole smarter than that and believe something like original sin and vicarious atonement. It would be a logical decison based on your preference not to be lynched, crucified, or burned to death by your pious neighbors.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Some decisions can be made using logic alone. Is 2 + 2 = 2 X 2? Some decisions can be made using logic and preference. Should I walk or drive to the store? If I drive, I save time, and if I walk, I save money. Thus by consulting preference and using logic, I can make a decision. Some decisions are strictly preference. What flavor of ice cream should I buy?

Now of course you might prefer that 2 + 2 = 2 X 3! You could "choose" to believe that. It would not be logical. It is hard to see what advantage would accrue to you from such a decision. some might think it really, really stupid.

You could to be a whole smarter than that and believe something like original sin and vicarious atonement. It would be a logical decison based on your preference not to be lynched, crucified, or burned to death by your pious neighbors.

Why not simply say "no, not all decisions can be made by logic alone."

Take the original question,
"Can decisions be made using logic alone?"

Logically the answer would be yes, as we know of decisions that have been made in the past by using logic alone it has been tested and works. However, I think that that question was actually not what the questioner wished to know when one reads the next part of his post

"I personally don't think logic can be applied to every situation that arises, but what do you think?".

Logically the answer to this might be yes or it might be no as it is asking for an opinion and opinions vary. However, again one might interpret the actual question intuitively to be.

"Can every decision be made correctly by using logic alone?"

This is how I interpret the information I gleaned from the OP. Although I went about the process in a logical manner, I also used my innate ability to discern connotations within the communications of others to make the decision about what I thought the OP was trying to say. Using logic alone one cannot make a good determination about the intentions of the OP because his communication does not fully express his intent, at least if I am correct in my interpretation of his intent.

 

[jpcedotal]

Answers to math equations are not decisions...

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It seems to me that,

Logic is objective.

Reason is subjective.

Mostly.

 

[Illuminaughty]

Origin of the logical.-- How did logic come into existence in man's head? Certainly out of illogic, whose realm originally must have been immense. Innumerable beings who made inferences in a way different from ours perished; for all that, their ways might have been truer. Those, for example, who did not know how to find often enough what is "equal" as regards both nourishment and hostile animals--those, in other words, who subsumed things too slowly and cautiously--were favored with a lesser probability of survival than those who guessed immediately upon encountering similar instances that they must be equal. The dominant tendency, however, to treat as equal what is merely similar--an illogical tendency, for nothing is really equal--is what first created any basis for logic.

In order that the concept of substance could originate--which is indispensible for logic although in the strictest sense nothing real corresponds to it--it was likewise necessary that for a long time one did not see or perceive the changes in things. The beings that did not see so precisely had an advantage over those who saw everything "in flux." At bottom, every high degree of caution in making inferences and every skeptical tendency constitute a great danger for life. No living beings would have survived if the opposite tendency--to affirm rather than suspend judgement, to err and make up things rather than wait, to assent rather than negate, to pass judgement rather than be just-- had not been bred to the point where it became extraordinarily strong.


from Nietzsche's The Gay Science, s.111, Walter Kaufmann transl..​

 

[brightlights]

I personally don't think logic can be applied to every situation that arises, but what do you think?

No decision can be made without desire.

 

[Gottservant]

Wow! Really interesting thread.

My understanding is that logic is one of three main possibilites in the DNA, the other two being intuition and heuristics (there is a neutral position of referential thinking, but that doesn't really count as an exercise of the mind, and is therefore not great). I get this from the fact that they are variations on the theme of "exercising the mind".

So you can have someone who can't work things out logically and so they work it out intuitively, but then they have to repeat it, so logically they decide to use heuristics, which is just getting it done however works. For example.

 

[Eudaimonist]

No decision can be made without desire.

No decision can be made without intent. I'm not so sure about desire, though I will grant that it may be needed as a motivation to act on one's decision.


eudaimonia,

Mark