Question

[variant]

Logic, as a means for unveiling truth, is justified because it works?

Because it is necessary for a working model yes.

 

[Received]

Because it is necessary for a working model yes.

Technically speaking (going back to post 7), there is no logical justification for logic, then. There's pragmatic justification (because without logic we couldn't exist), but not logical (i.e., truth-related) justification.

 

[variant]

Technically speaking (going back to post 7), there is no logical justification for logic, then. There's pragmatic justification (because without logic we couldn't exist), but not logical (i.e., truth-related) justification.

The observation that logic is necessary is a justification that contains logic but doesn't depend on it, thus it is logical but not circular.

 

[Received]

The observation that logic is necessary is a justification that contains logic but doesn't depend on it, thus it is logical but not circular.

Well freaking said.

What I'm saying is that, although it might have a logic to it, you can't justify logic (as truth) by appealing to logic (as truth), or else you'd be begging the question. You're not doing this if you justify logic (as truth) by appealing to logic (as what works). A position I fully endorse.

 

[variant]

Well freaking said.

What I'm saying is that, although it might have a logic to it, you can't justify logic (as truth) by appealing to logic (as truth), or else you'd be begging the question. You're not doing this if you justify logic (as truth) by appealing to logic (as what works). A position I fully endorse.

Then it appears we are in agreement.

 

[Received]

Then it appears we are in agreement.

Be still my heart!

BTW, what do you think of the Chesteron quote that Medieval put out there on the first page?

 

[variant]

Be still my heart!

BTW, what do you think of the Chesteron quote that Medieval put out there on the first page?

I'm not sure.

"Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding truth; on the contrary, truth is necessarily an instrument for using logic—for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth and for the profit of humanity. Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it." G. K. Chesterton

To an extent he seems to be saying that logic is a description of truths that we see as evident in reality, which I agree with but I question wether or not logic is already required in the process of observing reality in the first place.

 

[juvenissun]

How can people believe in truths without evidence?

They can't.
There must be some evidences.
The trick is: their evidences may not be evidences for you.