tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post9000262999729138127..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: ethics and contradictionsVictor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-20172466446536691652021-10-27T06:29:34.463-07:002021-10-27T06:29:34.463-07:00Formal debates have previously agreed upon rules, ...Formal debates have previously agreed upon rules, informal debates often lack them.<br /><br />Why should any single logic be the one that universally corresponds to reality better than any other logic at all times? Perhaps different situations call for different types of logic.One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-64416593241731785912021-10-26T15:57:26.218-07:002021-10-26T15:57:26.218-07:00You can create other logics, but which logic corre...You can create other logics, but which logic corresponds to reality? I would have thought that if I was debating someone and caught them contradicting themselves, I won the debate. But maybe not, maybe I am simply presupposing an axiom of folk logic, and it doesn't really matter. Victor Repperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-80951662009799228462021-10-26T06:44:12.690-07:002021-10-26T06:44:12.690-07:00The "Law of Non-Contradiction" is merely...The "Law of Non-Contradiction" is merely a position that the process of applying logical values to a sentence is a function, as opposed to a more general relation. Many people find it useful much of the time, but you can create logics that allow for statements to be assigned both values (or even more, for logics that have more values).One Browhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11938816242512563561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-51833992504733104782021-10-26T05:48:43.367-07:002021-10-26T05:48:43.367-07:00The law of nontradiction says that a statement can...<b>The law of nontradiction says that a statement cannot be both true and false. But if the question is whether McDonald's burgers are better than those of In-N-Out's, then there is an implied "for me" clause which prevents the law of noncontradiction from applying.</b><br /><br />I think this is a muddled presentation.<br /><br />The LNC states that a statement cannot be both true and false <b>at the same time and in the same sense</b><br /><br />The bare statement that one burger is better than another doesn't contain enough information to make a judgement. In what sense is one better than another? It's not that the LNC doesn't apply, it's simply that the statement is ambiguous. But if the sense is my personal taste at this moment, then the LNC certainly applies. bmillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05855545675821692382noreply@blogger.com