Embed Notice

@AdrianRiskin @Radical_EgoCom @abhayakara @magitweeter I think maybe I have some faint common ground with you here: logic (as with any other system of thought) at some point relies on some "givens" that themselves can't be empirically proven. This isn't really "faith" or "blind belief," however; it's based on other considerations.

I'm quite partial to logic because

a. It is much more internally consistent than most other systems of thought

b. The conclusions and explanations it offers up (i.e., pretty much everything from all sciences) are more likely than those of other systems to fit the real-world experiences and observations of lots of humans, as well as to predict other experiences.

c. Science is logic-based. Compared to competing systems, logic leads to bridges falling down a lot less, electricity making our appliances work more, people being abused less (my field), vaccines helping fewer people get sick and die, etc.

If you have an alternative system, explain. If you don't, and you just want to say "nothing works," the evidence strongly contradicts that position.