72. Logic (Critical Thinking, Part 1) | THUNK

"Logic" isn't just being reasonable; it's a formal system of finding truth, like math. Why did nobody tell me?!

(Quick note: the Law of the Excluded Middle is omitted in this video, both for time & because I think it's a little finicky to define in a way that won't be misunderstood colloquially.)

-Links for the Curious-

[ThreeSided]

I'd like to say that I love your videos. Every time one come out I get excited. The things you talk about are ideas and thoughts that are important to me and that I have thought about a lot, so it's great to see someone else saying similar things.

[nickballin]

Interesting take on logic. I have to admit: I've had a lot of professors stress the importance of critical thinking in my time as a collrge student but never had a person explain to exactly what critical thinking is…

[jonathandhilliard]

I think about logic as the generally accepted principles of accounting for the truth of one's beliefs about things. Without it being taught in our schools, we continue to raise generation after generation of people who are utterly unable to account for the truth of what they think, believe, say and hear, or what they read and write. The world is awash with these people.

My first class in logic was definitely one of the most profound influences on my ability to observe things myself, and to describe them to others. It also left me feeling very dissatisfied and disappointed with our education systems which continue to ignore this deficit. I feel it is professionally negligent on their part to allow this ridiculous state of affairs to persist when it would be so easy to rectify.

So that's what I thunk as I watched and listened, and thunk you for your video! A light in the darkness of the internet.

[remo]

Logic is not like math, it IS math. The same way physics is applied math for the physical world. Logic is applied math for the metaphysical world. The methodology is the same, but logic is MUCH more difficult to prove than physics. (as you demonstrated in your video). On top of this, logic is not easy to teach BECAUSE it is such a fundamental part of life.
Logic is not like other subjects that teach you about life on Earth, but it's on the same playing field as religion. Asking questions like, "Why is there life on Earth?" . Look at the trouble with teaching evolution in school.
Basically, we can't have a logic or "philosophy" class that won't inherently disprove religion. Therefore, we can't have it. But we can teach it through other classes, and that's the beauty of logic. Nice video!

[lovelyscholar]

I am NOT good at understanding logic. (As in...I didn't even properly grasp the first rule...seriously). However, I'm very good at understanding when something is ILLOGICAL (as in, I understand why the example works and why the false one is false). But this video really piqued my interest and makes me want to actually understand it once and for all. So thank you! Looking forward to the rest of the series!

[CmdrEdem]

Ah... Modus Tollens. That takes me back. It was a recurrent joke amongst my Computer Science friends, when we wanted to say that something was logical we used to say "Due to Modus Tollens...", even if it made no sense to use MT at that instance.

[WAX]

And that is at the root of all of humanity's problems sadly history repeats itself over and over.

[plamgogbg]

Got the answer of the Wason Selection test right from the begining. :)

[AlexmanGR]

YES! I answered the The Wason Selection Task correctly. Ego+5

[omegaful]

What's the difference between:
1.)"B if A"
2.)"B if only A"
3.)"if A then B"
4.)"if A then only B"
5.)"only if A then B
etc those were the only 5 i could think of. I feel like their different, but i don't have a good reason right now.

[GaudioWind]

It seems to me that all logic reduces to saying that “not everyone is like that if you can find at least one that is not like that”.
I think all of the nine rules of logic, or whatever philosopher can call it, are simply different ways of stating this basic assumption. And I think we may have taken it from our daily experience rather than some supernatural principle.

[joeyjojojunior]

I failed the Wason test. back to school for me

[kibofraggins]

I have a question.

How do i derive the category of proposition concretely through use of language? how do i know im not using some artefact of language native to my own understanding that someone else would disagree as to the content of thereby rendering all my logical pondering subjective and thereby incommunicable as a logically consistent system.

Fantastic video though very thunk provoking :)

[nicardopinnock]

when are you going to do an episode on Karl Marx philosophical idea "historical materialism"?

[MilanStojanovic]

But how do we know the rules of logic are right?

[EmperorsNewWardrobe]

Dear mr thunk, this question is not directly to this video but have you encountered the idea of one's ego as an illusion? Sam harris, with whom I'm sure you're familiar, wrote extensively about it in his book 'waking up'. Where logical reasoning meets spiritual ideas is my current focus of interest!

[Fiddling_while_Rome_burns]

If I was to write x=2, x+=2., x=? How many people would get the answer right? Could I legitimately criticise people for not understanding or is it down to my notation? I find the problem with the Wason test and all logic in general the deliberate obscureness of the language used to make simple points. Language by definition is a tool to convey meaning, logical language fails to  ask simple question simply then criticises people who get the answers wrong as not being able to think. For me logical language is about creating inaccessibility to keep well paid individuals in a jobs like priests of old writing in Latin so the public can never understand and needs them.

A friend studying logic gave me the Wason many years ago. I answered all four, he said I was wrong, but I argued I was right, Empiricists believe knowledge comes from trial and error not deduction, trying all possibilities not only gets you to the right answer it teaches you the underlying mechanics of how something works by learning all possible rights and wrongs in all contexts. Having this complete understanding of something then allows you to further experiment, understand and innovate. Simply going from 'a' to 'b' the quickest route in a single context is not learning or thinking it's programming, Logic at heart is a computer algorithm run on the human brain and an algorithm that jealously tries to block your mind from running other algorithms. 

One question I have for logicians I have always wondered. When you analyse something logically, how do you choose which logic to use for that particular thing you are analysing. For example you have something you wish to logically analyse, you can use formal logic, , fuzzy logic, para-consistent logic, multivalued logic and so on. Rather that discuss the merits of these forms, what is the process for deciding which one to use?

[PaddyMacNasty]

Is there a name for these logic equations? Are they helpful for real life or is it really just academic?

[SonOfMan-YT]

The GMAT exam requires the use of logic

[hughjarce]

There is nothing wrong with a Folex. It's an excellent watch.