Simple Logic

2006-1-1 04:10:00

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Kimber writes:

The rules of logic CAN be applied to truths and practicing formal logic gives one the ability to critically analyze conclusions, but one can use the rules of logic 'perfectly' and still be very far from the truth. I thought that this was the only point that Larry was trying to make and that he thought that he was being misunderstood on that point. It is easy to be confused by JJ's statement: "Perfect logic will never lead to a wrong conclusion" without operational definitions for the words he is using, and without knowing where JJ is coming from when he uses those words. The words he used in that sentence were very confusing to me. I think that Larry is simply letting JJ know that the words in his sentence can easily lead to confusion in people rather than to understanding.

It is important that members here realize that I do not make statements flippantly or that they are not thought out beforehand. Time and time again I have pushed the buttons of readers only to have many later see the point I was making and agree with it. Others challenged me over the years and quit in frustration because they reached a dead end.

Concerning this statement: "Perfect logic will never lead to a wrong conclusion."

I knew it would make some of you have second thoughts and instinctively reject it.

But there is one thing you'll notice about every teacher of light worth his salt and that is he chooses his words carefully to communicate his thought with as much exactness as possible. You'll recall in the Immortal books that John continually reminds us to listen to his exact words. You'll also notice how exacting are the words of DK, Jesus and many scriptures of the world.

The reason this statement was confusing to some was you forgot to ask yourself why I worded it this way. Some seemed to assume I just picked it out of the air with absolutely little thought behind it.

BUT all becomes clear when we realize the difference between a "conclusion" and a "decision" leading to action. A conclusion can be 100% accurate but when forced into a decision the person often has to choose somewhat blindly and can make errors.

Here is another example:

"From the data I have available I conclude that I have less than one chance in a million of winning the lottery."

Decision: "What the heck, I'll take a chance and buy one anyway."

After he realized he didn't win the lottery he can see he made a losing decision but had an accurate conclusion. He made a true assessment that the odds were against winning and was not disappointed.

On the other hand, there are many who just feel it is their time to win and draw the wrong conclusion that they will either win or have a good chance of winning.

In the first case flawless logic was used and was accurate and in the second no logic was used. Even if the guy won the lottery bad logic was still used. He was just lucky, not logical.

In other words, I used the word "conclusion" for a reason and gave a challenge without a full explanation. The reason for this? To stimulate your thought. It stimulated Larry more than I anticipated but at least it got some life flowing here.

Lisa writes:

Lawrence has already explained to you your misuse of the word "logic", and since you dismissed his explanation I won't waste my time. your inability to accept correction from someone who understands a subject better than you speaks volumes about your ego, and tells me all I need to know about you.

And my misuse was?

To accept correction I must see the error and the statement I made stands correct in my opinion. All one has to do to see this is to not substitute "decision" when the word "conclusion was used.

To see one's thought as being correct when challenged. has nothing to do with ego. If I saw I was wrong and refused to admit it then you are talking about ego, but this did not happen so your accusation of an ego problem has no substance.

Lisa:

By the way I agree with your conclusions about my example argument, but I do not agree with your personal definition of the word "logic". You have good common sense and good reasoning skills, but your ego gets in your way.

I do not know how many times I have to say this. I hope this one last time will do the trick. I have not used a personal definition of the word "logic" but used the number one dictionary definition which is: "the science of correct or reliable reasoning." Another definition which includes formal logic is usually number 2 or 3 in the various dictionaries.

I did not disagree with Larry in his definition, but made an effort that clarify that I was using the most common definition of the word and to understand what I was presenting we need to get on the same page in the use of the word.

The original presenter of a teaching is the one who will establish which definition of words is to be used. It only creates bedlam if someone does not like his definition and insists we use another.

If we want to know what Jefferson meant when he said "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness" we need to study the man's thinking. It tells us nothing about his teaching for a reader to insist that liberty means something different than was in Jefferson's mind.

Similarly DK uses one definition of "ego" and A Course in Miracles uses another. If we use DK's definition when reading A Course in Miracles we will only become confused. There's nothing wrong with the two teachers using different definitions. It's up to the student to discern what the teacher said and it is up to the teacher to make sure the student understands how he is using the word.

If anyone here is not clear what I mean when I use the word feel free to ask for elaboration.

Nobody will believe in you unless you believe in yourself. Liberace (1919 - 1987)