Invalid logic yield ambiguities, contradictions and inconsistencies. Those are complex unending problems to resolve at best, impossible at worse. Valid logic is well defined and relatively simple to deal with. Often enough, we are tracking a cause and effect relationship and to follow the chain of logic would lead us to the conclusion from an argument. With a logical argument we have more confident that the conclusion is verifiable.
To see if, based on the premises, the conclusions are valid and thus justified. I am more inclined to accept a conclusion based on consistent logic than one not because I want have accept conclusions that are true that I can act on and not base my decisions or judgments on false conclusions.
I will, if my conclusions are valid, be more effective and be more principled in my actions. Logic is designed to determine the truth of propositions for the purpose of acting, to act in the world.
My actions must be consistent with reality if my choices are to have the intended effect or to be living consistently with what it is I value.
The syllogism in particular is appealing in this way because it's the most explicit exercise of logic for arriving at the right conclusions.
I think that the syllogism is often overused and I actually never use it, but it is good to understand if only to better conceptualize what "logic" and "truth" actually mean.
I've seen people use syllogisms to "prove" things that any thinking person would reject outright. "Proofs" for god being an example of what I mean.
to work out if, based on the premises, the conclusions are valid and to that end justified. i'm extra susceptible to settle for a lead to step with consistent good judgment than one no longer because of the fact i prefer have settle for conclusions that are real that i'm able to act on and not base my judgements or judgments on fake conclusions. i visit, if my conclusions are valid, be extra smart and be extra principled in my movements. good judgment is designed to confirm the actuality of propositions for the objective of performing, to act in the worldwide. My movements could be consistent with actuality if my possibilities are to have the meant effect or to be living continuously with what that's I value. The syllogism specially is captivating in this way because of the fact it relatively is the main convey exercising of excellent judgment for arriving on the excellent conclusions. i think of that the syllogism is usually overused and that i in my view in no way use it, even though that's good to appreciate if just to extra desirable conceptualize what "good judgment" and "fact" honestly advise. i've got seen human beings use syllogisms to "instruct" issues that any thinking man or woman might reject outright. "Proofs" for god being an occasion of what I advise.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
Invalid logic yield ambiguities, contradictions and inconsistencies. Those are complex unending problems to resolve at best, impossible at worse. Valid logic is well defined and relatively simple to deal with. Often enough, we are tracking a cause and effect relationship and to follow the chain of logic would lead us to the conclusion from an argument. With a logical argument we have more confident that the conclusion is verifiable.
To see if, based on the premises, the conclusions are valid and thus justified. I am more inclined to accept a conclusion based on consistent logic than one not because I want have accept conclusions that are true that I can act on and not base my decisions or judgments on false conclusions.
I will, if my conclusions are valid, be more effective and be more principled in my actions. Logic is designed to determine the truth of propositions for the purpose of acting, to act in the world.
My actions must be consistent with reality if my choices are to have the intended effect or to be living consistently with what it is I value.
The syllogism in particular is appealing in this way because it's the most explicit exercise of logic for arriving at the right conclusions.
I think that the syllogism is often overused and I actually never use it, but it is good to understand if only to better conceptualize what "logic" and "truth" actually mean.
I've seen people use syllogisms to "prove" things that any thinking person would reject outright. "Proofs" for god being an example of what I mean.
to work out if, based on the premises, the conclusions are valid and to that end justified. i'm extra susceptible to settle for a lead to step with consistent good judgment than one no longer because of the fact i prefer have settle for conclusions that are real that i'm able to act on and not base my judgements or judgments on fake conclusions. i visit, if my conclusions are valid, be extra smart and be extra principled in my movements. good judgment is designed to confirm the actuality of propositions for the objective of performing, to act in the worldwide. My movements could be consistent with actuality if my possibilities are to have the meant effect or to be living continuously with what that's I value. The syllogism specially is captivating in this way because of the fact it relatively is the main convey exercising of excellent judgment for arriving on the excellent conclusions. i think of that the syllogism is usually overused and that i in my view in no way use it, even though that's good to appreciate if just to extra desirable conceptualize what "good judgment" and "fact" honestly advise. i've got seen human beings use syllogisms to "instruct" issues that any thinking man or woman might reject outright. "Proofs" for god being an occasion of what I advise.