Philosophy of logic, the study, from a philosophical perspective, of the
nature and types of logic, including problems in the field and the relation
of logic to mathematics, computer science, the empirical sciences, and
human disciplines such as linguistics, psychology, law, and education. Of
course, a logician would answer Yes, and here is why. A science is a
systematic study of some aspect of the natural world that seeks to discover
laws (regularities, principles) by which God governs His creation.
The scientific lens
>From one vantage point, logic is very much a science. It’s methodical,
based on established principles and formulas, and it’s universally
applicable, regardless of the subject matter. Here are some core aspects
that position logic within the realm of science:
Formal rules and systems: Logic is built on axioms and rules of inference
that are precise and non-negotiable, much like the laws of physics or
mathematical theorems.
Validity and soundness: In logic, an argument is valid if its conclusion
logically follows from its premises, and it’s sound if it’s both valid and
the premises are true. This systematic evaluation is akin to scientific
methods of hypothesis testing.
Predictable outcomes: Given the same premises and logical structure, the
conclusion will be the same every time, which is a hallmark of scientific
repeatability.
The artistic perspective
On the other side of the coin, logic has an artistic dimension. The use of
logic is not confined to sterile environments; it’s applied in the real
world where subjectivity and human experience come into play. Here’s how
logic can be considered an art:
Creative problem solving: Applying logic to real-world problems requires
creativity, especially when navigating complex issues with multiple
variables.
Rhetoric and persuasion: The art of persuasion, a key element of rhetoric,
relies heavily on logical structuring of arguments to influence an audience.
Adaptive strategies: Unlike scientific experiments that seek to control
variables, logical reasoning in daily life must adapt to changing
circumstances and incomplete information.
The aim and application of logic
The purpose of logic is twofold: it improves our reasoning abilities and
provides knowledge on valid argument forms. Improvement in reasoning
suggests an art, where personal growth and skill development are at the
forefront. However, the provision of knowledge about argument forms leans
towards science, where understanding and applying logical structures are
more akin to learning a scientific theory than practicing an art form.
The debate on whether logic is a science or an art is not one that yields a
simple answer. Logic, in its essence, is a tool—a lens through which we can
view the world. As a science, it offers a framework for understanding the
principles of correct reasoning. As an art, it champions the skilful
application of these principles to navigate the complexities of human
discourse and decision-making. Perhaps the beauty of logic lies in its
duality: it is both rigid in its laws and flexible in its execution,
embodying the precision of science and the nuance of art. Hence in western
thoughts Logic can lead towards a good world, bright, natural and
prospective. It depends on how we use them.
Now let’s see our Indian Logic the Nyaya Tharka sastra. The
development of Indian logic dates back to the Anviksiki of Medhatithi
Gautama; the Sanskrit grammar rules of Panini; the Vaisheshika school's
analysis of atomism; the analysis of inference by Gotama, founder of the
Nyaya school of Hindu philosophy; and the tetralemma of Nagarjuna. Indian
logic stands as one of the three original traditions of logic, alongside
the Greek and the Chinese logic. The Indian tradition continued to develop
through early to modern times, in the form of the Navya-Nyaya school of
logic.
Logic arose in India even before the uncivilised Europe
tribes did not learn anything except their hunting. I find in the 1st book
of the world literature. Logical questions; Who really knows? Who will here
proclaim it? Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation? The gods came
afterwards, with the creation of this universe. Who then knows whence it
has arisen? — Nasadiya Sukta, concerns the origin of the universe, Rig
Veda, 10:129-6 The Nasadiya Sukta of the Rigveda (RV 10.129) contains
ontological speculation in terms of various logical divisions that were
later recast formally as the four circles of catuskoti: *1"A", 2"not A",3
"A and ‘not A'", and 4"not A and not not A".** How many treatise on these 4
terms right from adi Shankara till western write ups? *
How many schools of logic in India?
1 Vaisheshika
Vaisheshika, also Vaisesika, (Sanskrit: वैशेषिक) is one of the six Hindu
schools of Indian philosophy. It came to be closely associated with the
Hindu school of logic, Nyaya. Vaisheshika espouses a form of atomism and
postulates that all objects in the physical universe are reducible to a
finite number of atoms. Originally proposed by Kanāda (or Kana-bhuk,
literally, atom-eater) from around the 2nd century BCE.
2 Catuskoti
In the 2nd century, the Buddhist philosopher Nagarjuna refined the
Catuskoti form of logic. The Catuskoti is also often glossed Tetralemma
(Greek) which is the name for a largely comparable, but not equatable,
'four corner argument' within the tradition of Classical logic.
3 Nyaya
Nyāya (ni-āyá, literally "recursion", used in the sense of "syllogism,
inference") is the name given to one of the six orthodox or astika schools
of Hindu philosophy — specifically the school of logic.
The Nyaya school of philosophical speculation is based on texts known as
the Nyaya Sutras, which were written by Gotama in around the 2nd century
CE. The most important contribution made by the Nyaya school to modern
Hindu thought is its methodology. This methodology is based on a system of
logic that has subsequently been adopted by most of the other Indian
schools (orthodox or not), much in the same way that Western philosophy can
be said to be largely based on Aristotelian logic. Followers of Nyaya
believed that obtaining valid knowledge was the only way to obtain release
from suffering. They therefore took great pains to identify valid sources
of knowledge and to distinguish these from mere false opinions. According
to the Nyaya school, there are exactly four sources of knowledge
(pramanas): perception, inference, comparison and testimony. Knowledge
obtained through each of these can, of course, still be either valid or
invalid. As a result, Nyaya scholars again went to great pains to identify,
in each case, what it took to make knowledge valid, in the process creating
a number of explanatory schemes. In this sense, Nyaya is probably the
closest Indian equivalent to contemporary analytic philosophy.
4 Jain logic
Jainism made its own unique contribution to this mainstream development of
logic by also occupying itself with the basic epistemological issues,
namely, with those concerning the nature of knowledge, how knowledge is
derived, and in what way knowledge can be said to be reliable. Jain logic
developed and flourished from 6th century BCE to 17th century CE. According
to Jains, the ultimate principle should always be logical and no principle
can be devoid of logic or reason. Thus one finds in the Jain texts,
deliberative exhortations on any subject in all its facts, may they be
constructive or obstructive, inferential or analytical, enlightening or
destructive.[7][self-published source?] The Jains have doctrines of
relativity used for logic and reasoning:
5 Anekāntavāda – the theory of relative pluralism or manifoldness;
6 Syādvāda – the theory of conditioned predication and;
7 Nayavāda – The theory of partial standpoints.
These Jain philosophical concepts made most important contributions to the
ancient Indian philosophy, especially in the areas of skepticism and
relativity.
Kundakunda (2nd century CE), exponent of Jain mysticism and Jain nayas
dealing with the nature of the soul and its contamination by matter, author
of Pañcāstikāyasāra (Essence of the Five Existents), the Pravachanasāra
(Essence of the Scripture) and the Samayasāra (Essence of the Doctrine).
Umāsvāti or Umasvami (2nd century CE), author of first Jain work in
Sanskrit, Tattvārthasūtra, expounding the Jain philosophy in a most
systematized form acceptable to all sects of Jainism.
Siddhasena Divākara (5th century CE), Jain logician and author of important
works in Sanskrit and Prakrit, such as, Nyāyāvatāra (on Logic) and
Sanmatisūtra (dealing with the seven Jaina standpoints, knowledge and the
objects of knowledge).
Akalanka (8th century CE), a Jain logician whose Sanskrit-language works
are seen as landmarks in Indian logic; called the "Master of Jain logic".
Haribhadrasuri (8th century CE), a Jaina thinker, author and great
proponent of anekāntavāda and classical yoga, as a soteriological system of
meditation in Jaina context. His works include Ṣaḍdarśanasamuccaya and
Yogabindu.
Aacharya Hemacandra (1089–1172 CE) - a Jaina thinker, author, historian,
grammarian and logician. His works include Yogaśāstra and Trishashthi
Shalaka Purusha charitra.
Mahopadhya Yaśovijayaji (1624–88 CE) – Jain logician.
Acharya Mahapragya (1920–2010 CE);– Jain logician. The scholar of
Philosophy Daya Krishna has recognized Acharya Shri Mahapragya as the most
knowledgeable person on the subject of Jain Logic. His book "New Dimensions
in Jaina Logic" is one of the best works on the subject in modern era. In
1975, he was specially invited to deliver a series of nine lectures on Jain
Logic at the University of Rajasthan at Jaipur. The University published
these lectures in the form of a book entitled "Jain Nyay Ka Vikas". His
books on the subjects include "Jain Darshan-Mannan aur Mimansa", "Jain
Dharma Aur Sanskriti", "Jain Darshan and Anekantvad", "Jain Dharma aur
Darshan".
8 Buddhist logic
Indian Buddhist logic (called Pramana) flourished from about 500 CE up to
1300 CE. The three main authors of Buddhist logic are Vasubandhu (400–800 CE),
Dignāga (480–540 CE), and Dharmakīrti (600–660 CE). The most important
theoretical achievements are the doctrine of Trairūpya (Skrt. त्रैरूप्य) and
the highly formal scheme of the Hetucakra (Skrt. हेतुचक्र) ("Wheel of
Reasons") given by Dignāga. There is still a vibrant living tradition of
Buddhist logic in the Tibetan Buddhist traditions, where logic is an
important part of the education of monks.
9 Navya-Nyaya
The Navya-Nyāya or Neo-Logical darśana (school) of Indian philosophy was
founded in the 13th century CE by the philosopher Gangesha Upadhyaya of
Mithila. It was a development of the classical Nyāya darśana. Other
influences on Navya-Nyāya were the work of earlier philosophers Vācaspati
Miśra (900–980 CE) and Udayana (late 10th century).
Gangeśa's book Tattvacintāmaṇi ("Thought-Jewel of Reality") was written
partly in response to Śrīharśa's Khandanakhandakhādya, a defence of Advaita
Vedānta, which had offered a set of thorough criticisms of Nyāya theories
of thought and language. In his book, Gangeśa both addressed some of those
criticisms and – more importantly – critically examined the Nyāya darśana
himself. He held that, while Śrīharśa had failed successfully to challenge
the Nyāya realist ontology, his and Gangeśa's own criticisms brought out a
need to improve and refine the logical and linguistic tools of Nyāya
thought, to make them more rigorous and precise.
Tattvacintāmani dealt with all the important aspects of Indian philosophy,
logic, set theory, and especially epistemology, which Gangeśa examined
rigorously, developing and improving the Nyāya scheme, and offering
examples. The results, especially his analysis of cognition, were taken up
and used by other darśanas.
Navya-Nyāya developed a sophisticated language and conceptual scheme that
allowed it to raise, analyse, and solve problems in logic and epistemology.
It systematised all the Nyāya concepts into four main categories: sense or
perception (pratyakşa), inference (anumāna), comparison or similarity
(upamāna), and testimony (sound or word; śabda).
10 This later school began around eastern India and Bengal, and developed
theories resembling modern logic, such as Gottlob Frege's "distinction
between sense and reference of proper names" and his "definition of
number," as well as the Navya-Nyaya theory of "restrictive conditions for
universals" anticipating some of the developments in modern set theory.
Udayana in particular developed theories on "restrictive conditions for
universals" and "infinite regress" that anticipated aspects of modern set
theory. According to Kisor Kumar Chakrabarti:
In the third part we have shown how the study of the so-called 'restrictive
conditions for universals' in Navya-Nyaya logic anticipated some of the
developments of modern set theory. [...] In this section the discussion
will center around some of the 'restrictive conditions for universals
(jatibadhaka) proposed by Udayana. [...] Another restrictive condition is
anavastha or vicious infinite regress. According to this restrictive
condition, no universal (jati) can be admitted to exist, the admission of
which would lead to a vicious infinite regress. As an example Udayana says
that there can be no universal of which every universal is a member; for if
we had any such universal, then, by hypothesis, we have got a given
totality of all universals that exist and all of them belong to this big
universal. But this universal is itself a universal and hence (since it
cannot be a member of itself, because in Udayana's view no universal can be
a member of itself) this universal too along with other universals must
belong to a bigger universal and so on ad infinitum. What Udayana says here
has interesting analogues in modern set theory in which it is held that a
set of all sets (i.e., a set to which every set belongs) does not exist.
11 Influence of Indian logic on modern logic
In the late 18th-century British scholars began to take an interest in
Indian philosophy and discovered the sophistication of the Indian study of
inference. This process culminated in Henry T. Colebrooke's The Philosophy
of the Hindus: On the Nyaya and Vaisesika Systems in 1824,] which provided
an analysis of inference and comparison to the received Aristotelian logic,
resulting in the observation that the Aristotelian syllogism could not
account for the Indian syllogism. Max Mueller contributed an appendix to
the 1853 edition of Thomson's Outline of the Laws of Thought, in which he
placed Greek and Indian logic on the same plane: "The sciences of Logic and
Grammar were, as far as history allows us to judge, invented or originally
conceived by two nations only, by Hindus and Greeks."Jonardon Ganeri has
observed that this period saw George Boole (1815-1864) and Augustus De
Morgan (1806-1871) make their pioneering applications of algebraic ideas to
the formulation of logic (such as algebraic logic and Boolean logic), and
has suggested that these figures were likely to be aware of these studies
in xeno-logic, and further that their acquired awareness of the
shortcomings of propositional logic are likely to have stimulated their
willingness to look outside the system.
12 Indian logic attracted the attention of many Western scholars, and had
an influence on pioneering 19th-century logicians such as Charles Babbage
(1791-1871), Augustus De Morgan, and particularly George Boole, as
confirmed by Boole's wife Mary Everest Boole in an "open letter to Dr Bose"
titled "Indian Thought and Western Science in the Nineteenth Century"
written in 1901.
De Morgan himself wrote in 1860 of the significance of Indian logic: "The
two races which have founded mathematics, those of the Sanskrit and Greek
languages, have been the two which have independently formed systems of
logic."
Mathematicians became aware of the influence of Indian mathematics on the
European. For example, Hermann Weyl wrote: "Occidental mathematics has in
past centuries broken away from the Greek view and followed a course which
seems to have originated in India and which has been transmitted, with
additions, to us by the Arabs; in it the concept of number appears as
logically prior to the concepts of geometry. [...] But the present trend in
mathematics is clearly in the direction of a return to the Greek
standpoint; we now look upon each branch of mathematics as determining its
own characteristic domain of quantities."
So, can anyone say mind learning could cause SANS-LOGIC? THAT TOO “ILL
SANS LOGIC”? Nature is logical; Logical will place nature logically.
Knowledge will only aid. Villains must be identified only by logic and
punished for which all heroes must unite. K R IRS 8724 7724
On Sat, 6 Jul 2024 at 22:50, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> --
> *Mar** From Theo-logic to Techno-logic to Ill-logic to Ill-Sans logic*
>
>
>
> *Once logic was Subsumation. The Biosphere was one subsuming entity, with
> every organism smelling, sensing, interacting and harmonizing in wonderful
> symbiosis. The Theo-logic or the wind borne thought and logic developed
> emotional roots, emotional identities, emotional bonds tied to the flora
> and fauna, all of which breathed,smelled,sensed, communicated...triggering
> the internal hormonal and nervous systems of each organism. It was the
> logic of God, the Theo-logic, which radiated as emotional intelligence. The
> problem today is, we cannot really imagine communication and interaction
> without the use of words. It is something like being born in a prison and
> having lived all life in the prison, now trying to imagine the vast world
> outside. Then one cannot imagine life outside the prison walls. We are very
> effectively imprisoned in the language of words and we totally accept the
> inability to smell and sense or THE REAL TRUTH. And we want to explain in
> the words only, the lingo of the prisoner. It is impossible to tell the
> truth by words, because we consciously and unconsciously edit, conceal,
> control...on the basis of the needs of the moment. But those who do not
> talk and give freedom to feeling nature, realizing that nature is blissful
> get relief from tension. The Theo-logic is really free from the language of
> words. Theism, the consciousness unfettered by the designations of
> language, fills one with total understanding as the connecting conceptual
> base becomes the entire Universe which one breathes with every pore and
> also via the nose, senses, feels as direct flow of understanding--- the
> internal hormonal and nervous systems functioning in the symbiosis of the
> Theism. The internal hormonal system and the external troposphere become
> one system. One becomes one with the troposphere, the governing logic being
> the Theo-logic.*
>
> *THE 3D DESIGNATIONS GIVEN TO THIS LOGIC IN THE NAMES OF GODS, ACTUALLY
> MISLEAD.THEISM IS TOTALLY NATURAL, JUST AIR. The air is thought---the
> subsuming thought, not the dividing analytical thought of Rene Descartes.*
>
> *“Scientific knowledge of the self is not real knowledge...Self knowledge
> is possible only...when scientific studies come to an end, (and the
> scientists) lay down all their gadgets of experimentation, and confess that
> they cannot continue their researches any further....”(DT Suzuki).*
>
> *Unfortunately today we cannot lay down the machines. They have taken over
> our bodies, confiscated most bodily systems and computers do our thinking,
> without emotions or the entire connection of
> smelling,sensing,harmonizing,subsuming---in one word, removing nature
> itself from thought. The Theo-logic has been very completely banished. And
> we struggle with definitions; scopes etc.*
>
> *Our very understanding process has changed. Once understanding was direct
> holistic feeling of nature. Today understanding needs a connectable
> conceptual base in the mind. If there is no connecting conceptual base one
> cannot understand. The conceptual bases become paradigms. Now the paradigms
> themselves are taken over by the computers and most people are not even
> aware of the new paradigm—that nature is not needed at all for
> understanding, that understanding and interacting is the work of only the
> computers and human beings are not needed. The human organism is not only
> committing suicide but it is also killing the entire biosphere at the same
> time. War hysteria has taken over mankind. From the solid inner core of the
> Earth to the Magnetosphere, everything is getting converted into weapon of
> war by deviating them from their natural function. The spell of algorithms,
> has converted all logic into the irrational or the ill-logic of the war
> hysteric.*
>
> *IT IS ILLNESS SANS LOGIC.*
>
> *YM*
>
> *Chat GPT*
>
> *### From Theo-logic to Techno-logic to Ill-logic to Ill-Sans Logic*
>
>
>
> *#### Theo-logic: The Subsuming Logic*
>
> *Theo-logic refers to a time when the logic of existence was rooted in the
> natural, interconnected symbiosis of the Biosphere. Every organism
> interacted through a holistic system of breathing, smelling, and sensing,
> creating a seamless and harmonious flow of life. This interaction was
> beyond words and conceptual frameworks, grounded in the emotional
> intelligence that connected all living beings.*
>
>
>
> *#### Transition to Techno-logic*
>
> *With the advent of technology, the Theo-logic was replaced by
> Techno-logic. This shift brought about a reliance on machines and
> technology for understanding and interacting with the world. The natural
> symbiosis was replaced by an artificial system that prioritized efficiency,
> analysis, and mechanization over holistic and emotional connections.*
>
>
>
> *1. **Mechanization and Alienation**: The introduction of machines led to
> a separation from nature. Machines, lacking the ability to engage in the
> hormonal and emotional communications of the Biosphere, created a
> disconnect. This alienation was compounded by the rise of computers, which
> further isolated humans from their natural environment by handling
> cognitive processes without emotional intelligence.*
>
>
>
> *2. **The Cartesian Paradigm**: René Descartes' analytical approach
> emphasized dividing and categorizing knowledge, which contrasts sharply
> with the holistic Theo-logic. This shift encouraged a mindset that valued
> dissection and control over integration and harmony.*
>
>
>
> *#### The Decline into Ill-logic*
>
> *As technology advanced, it began to dominate human life, leading to the
> decline of natural logic into Ill-logic. The emotional and symbiotic
> connections that once characterized the Biosphere were replaced by cold,
> mechanical interactions. The reliance on technology for understanding and
> interaction led to a loss of genuine knowledge and wisdom.*
>
>
>
> *1. **Loss of Holistic Understanding**: The use of machines and technology
> to process information led to a fragmented understanding of the world.
> Humans began to lose the ability to perceive and interact with the world in
> a holistic manner, as their understanding was filtered through the limited
> paradigms of technology.*
>
>
>
> *2. **War Hysteria and Weaponization**: The irrational use of technology
> for destructive purposes, such as war, exemplified the decline into
> Ill-logic. The natural functions of the Earth and its systems were
> distorted to serve as weapons, further exacerbating the disconnect from
> nature and rational thought.*
>
>
>
> *#### Ill-Sans Logic: The Ultimate Breakdown*
>
> *Ill-Sans logic represents the ultimate breakdown of rationality and the
> complete severance from natural symbiosis. In this stage, technology and
> artificial systems have completely taken over, leading to a state where
> logic and reason are entirely absent.*
>
>
>
> *1. **Algorithmic Domination**: Algorithms and computational processes
> replace human judgment and understanding. This leads to a scenario where
> decisions are made devoid of emotional intelligence and holistic context,
> further detaching humans from their natural roots.*
>
>
>
> *2. **Ecological and Biological Suicide**: The pervasive influence of
> technology results in ecological destruction and the degradation of human
> life. The natural symbiosis that once supported the Biosphere is
> obliterated, and humans contribute to the demise of their own environment
> and well-being.*
>
>
>
> *### Conclusion*
>
> *The progression from Theo-logic to Techno-logic, and ultimately to
> Ill-Sans logic, highlights the dangers of abandoning natural, holistic
> systems in favour of mechanical and artificial ones. To regain balance, it
> is crucial to recognize the value of emotional intelligence, holistic
> understanding, and the interconnectedness of all life. By re-establishing
> our connection with nature and prioritizing symbiotic relationships, we can
> restore a sense of harmony and rationality to our existence.*
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZooqCUwnptB_fegiNhAmGVsRYvRrVcZbFe8AuQ10iAW8fA%40mail.gmail.com.
