Better written:

2012/11/10 Alberto G. Corona <>

> I always emphasize that there is a evolutionary logic, which  unlike any
> other logic, is tautological, that is assume no axioms beyond natural
> selection (which is tautological per se)
> I will define here this logic as clear as I can.
> Therefore evolutionary logic a good foundation for an absolute notion of
> both truth (including existence) and morals. Because is-ougth is unified
> under this logic.  This logic is rougly speaking convergent with the
> classical philosophical-religious logic of common sense. Besides being
> materialistic, it debunk the humean nominalist-positivist reductionsisms
> and, as i said, return back to the classical philosophical notions.
> Really all the modal logics are parts of this evolutionary logic. The
> directions of the arrows of the modal logics have a clear evolutionary
> background. for example G x -> x, Ox ->x, [] x -> x, Bx -> x, there is a
> evolutionary reason behind
> What is this evolutionary logic?
> Under evolutionary logic, truth, existence and goodness  becomes
> different aspects of the same essence, which have different names when seen
> from the point of view of logic, epistemology or morals.
> The truth of this logic is by definition  equal to
>  the-continuation-of-the-mind-in-the-world.
> The non sequitur, the definition of false, is the non-continuation-of-the
> mind-in-the-world.
> Everything that contributes to the continuation of the mind is true, exist
> and is good. Everything that does not contribute does not exist, is false
> and is evil.
> If a notion contributes to the mind dead, this notion is, evidently non
> existent (is disappearing or will disappear soon). It is false (non-
> sequitur). And it is not good (contributes to the death of the holder and
> his society)
> Therefore It is a fuzzy logic which assign various degrees of truth,
> existence and godness depending on the degree, immediacy and clarity with
> which something contributes to the persistence of the mind.
> There immediate evident, and universally consensuated  concepts that are
> truth, exist and are good: For example, that persons are males and females,
> the existence of persons, to preserve persons lifes.These sentences are
> respectively true, exist and is morally good because the knowledge included
> in these statements contribute inmediately and universaly to the
> persistence of the human minds in a social environment.
> In the other extreme of fuzziness are  more subtle and long term facts
> that  does not produce an inmediate persistence of the mind, but are long
> term,and in some circumstances  The existence of the electron, the
> existence of God, drug prohibition, the platonic realm etc.
> The accumulation of knowledge of evolutionary truths happens by many
> mechanism: biological darwinism, that develop specific circuirtry to
> recognize humans, recognize human faces,  handle social reasoning  (This
> instantiates in brain hardware the above statements about persons). There
> are also social mechanisms of accumulation of evolutionary knowledge, by
> tradition, philosophical, scientific debates, and also violent
> confrontation. among peoples and countries. The reason why Lamarkism is
> not true is more a factual consequence of the defeat of the USSR than a
> direct consequence of scientific debate. It may be said that lisenko
> Lamarkism was disastrous because ti contributed to the defeat of the
> USSR. But had the USSR won the cold war, we would accept the scientific
> truth of lamarkism, since socialism would have been sucessful and
> lamarkism is the only coherent evolutionary theory compatible with marxism,
> and darwinism is not. It would be far more painful and long term to
> convince people to get rid of it .
> All these processes are instances of a single process operating at
> differente levels: Natural selection. the proces of variation and
> selection at the biological, social political etc levels.
> Althougn this is formulated in crude materialistic terms,  This is
> identical to the classical philosophical and religious logic, that takes
> into account the reality of the whole experience of existence of the
> mind-soul in the word in all the dimensions: social and individual.   You
> may find Biblical and Philosophical texts that assimilate truth, existence
> and the good.
> 2012/11/10 Roger Clough <>
>> Is/ought and modal logic
>> 1) Hume's universe
>> The skeptic Hume said that there is the world of is, which we live in,
>> and the world of the moralists and religious folk, the world
>> as it ought to be, and there was not logical connection between them.
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> A speculation
>> The hierarchical "ladder" of modal logic below suggests that there may in
>> fact
>> be some sort of logical connection through this hierarchy or
>> ontology of logical types possibly rearranged in some ascending way
>> from the following list of types:
>> Modal Logic
>> [] It is necessary that ..
>> <> It is possible that ?
>> Deontic Logic
>> O It is obligatory that ?
>> P It is permitted that ?
>> F It is forbidden that ?
>> Temporal Logic
>> G It will always be the case that ?
>> F It will be the case that ?
>> H It has always been the case that ?
>> P It was the case that ?
>> Doxastic Logic Bx x believes that ?
>> ========================================================
>> 2) A platonist would see things quite differently:
>> Platonia, the world of reason and necessity and perfect,
>> would be more real than the dark caves we live in down here.
>> So platonists would say that platonia reality, the true world,
>> the world of being of "is"
>> The world down here is referred to by Leibniz as
>> the world of contingency. Scientists view this
>> as the actual world, so to them it would be the
>> world as it is. But a platonist wojuld see the world
>> down here--in the darkness of plato's cave-- as
>> the world as it ought NOT to be.
>>  --------------------------------------------------------
>> This all obviously needs to be better sorted out,
>> but I thought I might just send it out now for comments.
>> Roger Clough,
>> 11/9/2012
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> For more options, visit this group at
> --
> Alberto.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to