/lit/ - Literature

>>13578520
I recognize this pornstar, but can't remember her name; help?

>>13578604
lmfao

I fucking love big fucking Jewish jugs

>>13578520
If you can point out a kink in the formal logic of someone's argument you can make them look like a retard.

>>13578520
It only exists to avoid semantic confusion, and who do we know what has a hard time understanding semantic meaning?? That’s right... anglos (autists).

>>13578620
sounds like reason enough to learn logic, desu

>>13578520
I wrote out a very long explanation of the formation and necessity of Logic and it’s secret history steeped in Sorcery but I deleted it cuz who cares bro lol yolo

There is no one "logic." Aristotelian logic was formalized by late Aristotelians and Platonists, and then re-formalized by medievals and broken down and reconstituted multiple times. Early modern language is very different from that earlier tradition, and has a lot of weird splinter movements, and especially a lot of different goals (from logic as education in dialectic and therefore an aid to rhetoric, on the one hand, to a completely platonist/Leibnizian logic as the characteristica universalis of the world itself).

Even modern formal logic needs to be distinguished, from its prehistory in the 19th century to the formative period most often associated with Frege (but also including many intuitionists, neo-Kantians, and neo-Aristotelian who were often platonist with regard to logical referents), to the insanely autistic shit that anglo-analytic pseudo-philosophers now take for granted as the default language of philosophy.

If you want to learn the latter, I would recommend just eating a big piece of shit instead, because that's about how useful it is. If you really really want to learn it, go pick up any one of ten thousand glossy $100 textbooks produced in the last two years purporting to teach you symbolic and modal logic so that you can be the future handmaiden of soon-to-be-all-conquering cognitive science and artificial intelligence studies. You will easily be able to find these textbooks online because trillions of horrible little gooks are experts at stealing and cheating, so they will have uploaded it to convenient repositories for the benefit of others in their termitary.

If you want to learn Aristotelian logic, medieval logic, or early modern logic, that's cool, but that's basically just learning the metaphysics of whichever you choose and how their philosophy of formal dialectic/philosophy of language fits into that metaphysics.

DO NOT be an analytic.

DO NOT be a gook.

DO NOT be a STEMfag who thinks cognitive science is good.

>>13578615
>Plebian - her tits
>Patrician - her eyebrows

>>13578702
based

>>13578683
>criticizes pseuds
>acts like pseuds

>>13578520
Imagine busting a huge nut right on her face

So this is modern day /lit/ huh? I mean damn, just read this thread :3

>>13578748
>So this is modern day /lit/ huh? I mean damn, just read this thread :3

>>13578520
Logic will help you understand bayesian statistics and those together can help you understand rationalism and realism and together with the belief of an objective reality can help you better understand reality as it is rather than what you want.

Even if you are uninterested in nature of reality it will still help you making better decisions leading to an easier life, since you can make decisions grounded in reality.

>>13578683
I find modern formal logic to be pretty desu, but then again I am a mathfag. Now taking those formal systems philosophically at face value? Not even once.

>>13578520
>Shaved armpits
Filthy whore.

>>13578725
imagine busting a nut on her tongue

>>13580090
Imagine busting a nut

>>13578520
That's Ben Shapiro's sister right?

>>13578520
Yes, it is absolutely important and don't let the dumb pseuds screaming "muhh analytic" convince you otherwise. It will make you better at interpreting arguments and you will notice basic logical fuckups people make all the time. At the very least it is vital for reading any kind of philosophy that is not aphoristic or mystical (i.e., that makes arguments). Reading this stuff in combination with a solid grounding in logic should make you a more disciplined thinker and a better critic, regardless of whatever you think is the metaphysical status of such formal systems.

>>13580314
give more concrete examples, for example:
>It will make you better at interpreting arguments
i don't have the source to back it up, but i remember reading about how learning logic as an undergraduate didn't improve anyone's ability in logic reasoning tests. now, this doesn't mean that necessarily logic is at fault, since it could be that logic is taught in an innefective way, or that the tests themselves are faulty in some way, but i doubt, i really see no benefit in learning truth tables or whatever. but anyway, even if logic is useful, how? in what exact way does learning venn diagrams is going to help you on a debate on politics?
>At the very least it is vital for reading any kind of philosophy that is not aphoristic or mystical
besides memeing, would you consider, Kant, Descartes or Aristotle as "aphoristic" or "mystical". because i doubt you could dismiss any of their arguments as "formally wrong, thefore useless", and even if you do discard them, you'd be comitting the fallacy fallacy.
it seems that a lot of formal logic is useless outside of math/analytic phil. i can see how learning logical fallacies and things like modus ponens and categorical syllogisms are useful, because we use that reasoning on a day to day basis. but i haven't seen a good argument for learning symbolic logic and related autisms

>>13580105
stoicism is toxic! :(

>>13578520
https://youtu.be/Qz86dOMGHFg

>>13578604
Lexi Luna?

Just read Wittgenstein and leave philosophy behind you.

>>13578683
mathlet detected

>>13578520
It's logical.

>>13580105
Kek

>>13578604
Benina Shapiro

>>13578520
Idk about the study of logic in a rigorous way but learning to be more logical seems almost like a muscle to me. Debating helps develop it, reading and writing philosophy helps.

>>13580133
Ooh yeah bby

>>13578958
I’m unshaven

Imagine meeting an opera singing Jewess like Abby in Nazi times

>It's Summer 1939 in Vienna. You're a young Nazi officer who's out on the town to enjoy the new resurgence of wholesome German culture. At the grand opera house, you go to see a much anticipated Wagnerian production. However, when you look at the playbill, you see a very Jewish name on the role of the leading lady. You are a bit perturbed, but have enough trust in the production to give it a chance. Once it is underway, you become transfixed by the figure on stage. Under the dim lights, a sensuous silhouette proceeds to cry out a lonely aria that draws your senses towards it as if it were a Homeric siren. By the end of the Opera, you feel the need to meet this magnificent being and possess her. You use the little power you have to get an opportunity to make her acquaintance. After the ice is broken, a lengthy and complicated seduction occurs, and eventually you and her fall into a torrid love affair that is erotically charged by the taboo nature behind it.

>Your relationship is marked by physical passion and the shared love of culture and music. Dancing in the old halls of the city and listening to the symphonies and recordings of its masters, followed by long nights together. Naked, you take in the beauty of her pendulous breasts; and the glossy thicket of black hair between her smooth porcelain thighs is an intoxicating contrast to behold. These days and nights of bliss eventually come to an end when you are called to the front. Staying true to your ideals, you pry yourself away from this dreamworld and take up the burden of duty, vowing however, to return when all was finished.

>>13581193
>After a long deployment you are eventually wounded. During recovery, you are given leave to return home. Once there you search the city for her to find that she has vanished. In this frantic state, your comrades tell you that she went to join relatives in America for safety and you needn’t worry. You want to go there and find her. The opportunity comes when you are sent to Italy in 1943. You pay a corrupt local Mafioso to present you to the Americans as an Italian allied collaborator. You are given refugee status and sent to America a year later. There, under a new identity you make a lengthy search for her relatives and find them. They tell you that she never made it here, and died in Belzec camp a year ago, tearfully showing you the letter they received.

>>13581197
>It is now 1996. You are an old man living in an American suburb with an American wife and family. A surviving brother in Europe is the only one left of your old family. You have three kids but one stopped speaking to you when they joined a group of radicals in college. One of them just brought their kids over to your place on the way back from the mall. You don’t like the way he lets them dress. They seem excited ripping open the plastic covers on the things they just bought. Trying to show you their new music disks. The people on one look deformed with piercings and weird hairstyles, the other one looks like black criminals. They also have electronic things that they are frantically pressing buttons on to make noises. They try to show you how it works and you listen, nodding along, but not really getting it. Eventually you get tired and excuse yourself. Going down to your study in the basement, you take a seat in the big leather chair and pull out an old record. The record’s initial crackling opens into a haunting waltz and you close your eyes while laying back. Suddenly, you can see the beautiful Vienna dance halls once more, and she is there in your arms again; her merry laughter drowning out the clamor upstairs

>>13581031
Post pic pls

>>13578520

If you have NEVER studied logic, it is helpful to think about what makes something really true and how we make inferences. In philosophy it can help you construct arguments and identify mistakes.

But you really don't need to go that deep to get those benefits. An intro and some thoughtful writing will get you there.

> if most arguments are informal

Arguments are still structured logically even if the premises can't be deduced.

If you are a mathematician or into CS logic becomes more useful. You can use it to design proofs or disentangle confusing statements like the negation of epsilon delta definition of limits. But at this stage it is more like a technical skill.

>>13581031
pretty based

>>13578520
Would love to impregnate her.

"all philosophers are tyrannized by logic"
friedrich nietzsche, philosopher OF THE dionysus 2019

>>13578604
>>13578615
Cumbrains are cancer.

>>13578520
>I mean, do you seriously gain anything studying formal arguments if most arguments are informal?
You can use logic to analyze informal arguments as much as ones that are formal.
But generally, the biggest point of studying logic is to get a better understanding of truth.

>>13578520
It's useful in epistemology, as long as your honest and don't pilpul (especially yourself).

>>13578683
>different people in different times have had different views of what logic is
>logic is a waste of time and meaningless

Well you're probably some relativist scum so I'm probably wasting my time but I hope you see how awful of an argument you made was. Contemporary logicians disagree about a lot but also they have good objections to the formal systems of say Aristotle, Abelard, Frege etc. All fields of inquiry change over time, in the natural sciences we take this as evidence of progress. Cognitive scientists don't use contemporary, say, paraconsistent logics in their work. All interesting work in logic is done in math and philosophy departments. You have this classic conty mixup where you think stem is an actual meaningful grouping as if the natural sciences and math aren't radically different.

>>13578894
based mathfag

>>13580523
Well doing some symbolic logic is the best way to have a clear picture of what modus ponens, tollens, etc. mean. I agree that the average undergrad phil. student doesn't need much beyond this, although a little modal logic and truth tables I think is helpful for precisely the reason stated above. Thinking about objections to the material implication theory of conditionals is good for this group too. But you are right-- the average undergrad doesn't need a big education in basic set theory, proof theory, or contemporary paraconsistent logics

>>13581350
"all literary studies professors are tyrannized by neech"
-all reasonable people 2019

>>13578520
The practical use of formal logic is calling coding. Its the basis of programming.

>>13581031
That makes you in particular no less a filthy whore.