It seems that in order to prove logic, one would need to assume logic, so the proof would assume its own truth, thus being circular.
But is there not another way to prove logic? Take for example "if A is bigger than B, and if B is bigger than C, then A is necessarily bigger than C". This is necessarily true.
The above has supposedly to be taken on faith but consider the following experiment.
Let's say i put three rocks of different sizes next to each other. I name them A, B and C. Now, from this observation it will be evident that if A is bigger than B and if B is bigger than C then there is no alternative but to keep A as the biggest rock. It is evident from the senses.
According to me, logic can be demonstrated this way, but not according to the philosophers. Can anybody show me where my reasoning fails?
br/GH
2007-09-02
23:06:50
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Christoffer S
1
in
Philosophy