Philosophy Now Forum

It sometimes seems that rational deduction can lead you wherever you want to go if you are creative and imaginative enough.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:12 pm It sometimes seems that rational deduction can lead you wherever you want to go if you are creative and imaginative enough.

Or evidence can take you where you didn't expect.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:46 am Who sez He cannot? All I say is He does not.

It's pretty standard practice here to put words in people's mouths, henry. I, myself, have said no end of stuff that I never said.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:12 pm It sometimes seems that rational deduction can lead you wherever you want to go if you are creative and imaginative enough.

Deduction is a slippery beast. First, the obvious problems that come from faulty premises. But after that all kinds of semantic issues, presumptions inside language itself, the limits of current knowledge. I find it amazing, for example, what people think they can rule out using deduction. I mean, why leave the house and go to the lab or the interview room? It's not like we don't have examples from the past where people thought they could rule out things and their arguments looked all tidy and gleaming on the page....but it turned out they were wrong. And just to show the other side of this thread's coin. I had a guy in another thread proclaim that everyone who believes in free will is evil. Why? Well, first of all, none of them potty train their kids. (no mention of whether this is true in reality) The he went on to show that one could deduce from the belief in free will that it was unnecessary. Just close your eyes in an armchair at home and bang...no need for sociology, psychology and research.

I blame Socrates.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 12:15 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Aug 02, 2022 11:46 am Who sez He cannot? All I say is He does not.

It's pretty standard practice here to put words in people's mouths, henry. I, myself, have said no end of stuff that I never said.

I don't think O was tryin' that. I just think he has a definition of deism in his head he thinks applies to all deists.