Is this logic? ("I" don't think it is?)?

Question

Thought exists.
All thoughts are real.
Infinity is a thought.
Therefore, infinity exists.
Nothing is a thought.
therefore, nothing exists.
As all thoughts exist in thought, every thought exists.
ONLY thought exists.
thought is boundless, as is "nothing" and "infinity".
What do i suggest?

vladbath you miss the point. There is no logical argument, that is why you do not see it.
All premises are the basis of thought.
Thus all thoughts are premises.
Thoughts of infinity and nothing are not predicated.

jonmcsomething, you are mistaken????
All manifestations are a representation of thought.Relatively speaking you are wrong.
Your argument is based of course on logic, not fact. You shouldn't state innacurate facts. i dont.

"Not really logical"- This kind of sums up logic.

No, not capice. Pegasuses exist in your thought i guess. Therefore the thought of a pegasus exists. Think of a lion for example, just because you think of a lion doesn't mean it exists? What of a blind man? Does nothing exist to a blind man, or every thought of a blind man? Capice? Dont believe everything you see. Or read. Take your head out the books and into the clouds.

Ivan r- "I" suggest you read your own thoughts instead of that of others, it might do you good. Incidentally, what you say is along the lines of what i think. Maybe you should READ MORE CAREFULLY.

Pauline-- What is inside the jam? Take a look.

Ivanr-- i also suggest you ask more questions. Unless of course you have all the answers?

Answer 1

You are suggesting that there is only thought, which is true, to the extent that we are the observer and observe via thought. It is also true that there is no thought in the universe. Thus, we live in a universe of thought, no thought and thought/no thought combined.

What you are suggesting is partial logic.

Answer 2

I suggest you study the content more clearly with greater THOUGHT. It is true, thoughts exist. (in one's own mind-taking the singular case), but not all thoughts are real. One can think of infinity and believe it exists as a thought but how can nothing be a thought. The mind is incapable of non-thought because to do so, the brain would be dead. Thoughts exist but as do many other things as well, thought is not alone. Finally, thought can be boundless, limited only to the intelligence of the brain creating the thought.

Answer 3

It’s a syllogism, a form of logic. One of the most famous syllogisms is “ All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, therefore, Socrates is mortal.” Lets take a look at it one line at a time...

"Thought exists." True and false at the same time. Whatever you think about exists in a non-physical manner simply because it has entered your brain and you are thinking about it. However, if you think "I'd like to have a blue car" a blue car doesn't appear in front of you so in that physical sense it's false.

"All thoughts are real". Well yes, again because you are thinking thoughts and you are real so they are real non-physically though. If you consider everything that is “real” to have physical dimensions, then no, not all thoughts are real; again the blue car.

"Infinity is a thought." I guess you could call it that. It's more like a theory. The difference between them is that a thought is something that one calls to one's conscious mind. A theory is a proposed explanation whose status is still hypothetical, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. (Definitions provided by www.dictionary.com) So a thought is something that can just pop into your head at any moment but a theory is a proposition based on scientific research that tries to explain something but has not yet been proven correct. For example, you wouldn't say "I had a theory about a blue car appearing" you would say "I had a thought about a blue car appearing." Back to the infinity line...once again, it's more of a theory than a thought, although, as far as I know we had proven that infinity exists so since it's no longer hypothetical it's not a theory. In the context, I think it's meant as you can have thoughts about infinity.

"Therefore, infinity exists" Well it does exist because we have proven that it does (take any number keep adding one, you'll never reach a number that you will not be able to add 1 to). It’s not physical in any form though.

"Nothing is a thought." The concept of "nothing" is a thought, once again because you can think about it but it also is real nonphysically. However you could interpret it as saying “there is not anything that is a thought” which would be false.

"Therefore, nothing exists." I'm not sure how the word "nothing" is meant here. The first way you could interpret it is "there is not anything that exists" as in the world is void of any existence whatsoever. If this is the way it was intended to be used, then it is obviously false. The second way is that the CONCEPT of "nothing" does exist. This is sort of hard to explain but if in the line it is meant as a concept then it could be true. However, a lot of times in common conversation we use the word "nothing" in the wrong sense. For example,

Person 1: “(says something unintelligible)

Person 2: "What?" (as in asking what it was that person 1 said)

Person 1: "Nothing" (as in what they said wasn’t important and didn’t need to be repeated; obviously they said something, but we use a lot of words in places they shouldn't be used in these days)

“As all thoughts exist in thought, every thought exists.” Yes this is true because all thoughts are non-physical and anything you think of in your head exists in your head as a thought. If you get what I mean.

“ONLY thought exists.” Um...depends what way you take it. There is physical matter in our world that no one may be thinking of at this moment but it’s still there. It doesn’t exist in the first place because someone just happened to think about it and it appeared. But, anything that humans have made (physical stuff not like global warming) had to have come from a thought because someone had to think of it in order to make it. But, no one ever thought of “making” trees. They are just here. Unless you believe that our entire universe is not reality but instead some sort of fantasy, then I guess that line would be true; but for all us sane people, it’s false.

“Thought is boundless, as is "nothing" and "infinity". I think this is partly true. Yes, thought is boundless because there is nothing you can’t think of. “Nothing is boundless”...hmm...In the sense that everything has limits it is mostly true; there may be a few exceptions such as the universe (we don’t know if it ends or if it’s just a big circle or whatever) and time (you could say that when the sun explodes and the human race ends that time ends because there may not be anything else out there that is keeping track of time but if you launched a watch into space it would still go) and infinity. But in the sense that the CONCEPT of “nothing” has no limits I’m not sure. Infinity is boundless because it has no end obviously because that what the word “infinity” means.


Okay, to review:

Here we have our first syllogism:

Thought exists.
All thoughts are real.
Infinity is a thought.
Therefore, infinity exists.


You could put in parenthesis “Thought exists.
All thoughts are real.” to make another syllogism

Nothing is a thought.
therefore, nothing exists.



As all thoughts exist in thought, every thought exists.
ONLY thought exists.
thought is boundless, as is "nothing" and "infinity".

“What do i suggest?” Well you could condense it all into:

Infinity exists
Nothing exists
All thoughts exists
Only thoughts exist
Thoughts can go on forever
Nothing can go on forever
Infinity can go on forever

This is a whole big contradiction and makes no sense so no it’s no logic .

Answer 4

If you can grasp infinity or nothing as a thought -- which is like imagining a chiliagon-- if we grant you that, then both contents of thought exist AS thought. Any move from 'thoughts are real' to the content of thought exist, is illigitimate.

"Only thoughts exist" is idealism .. . ... which destroys our common notion of the external world. It leads to solipsism, skepticism, and abject meaninglessness.

Our thoughts, to be true, must be ABOUT the world. You can dream up Pegasuses all you want, that does not make them real.

Capice?

Answer 5

Hmmm. I think you might be toying with logical fallacy, here, in the first 4 lines. If by "real" you mean something like "in the physical world."

You have to define your terms. But I guess that would be considered an argument from logic. Deductive logic. Your argument is not really logical, though.

Answer 6

this is very like the question I ask when I want people to get upset and send them mad, and believe it I asked it once and the poor guy ended up in a mental hospital. If jam is enclosed in a jar and the jar is in the fridge and the fridge is enclosed in your home it obviously means that everything has a start and a finish. So if you think of it like that where does space ( meaning outer space ) start and finish ? and what is it contained within, and what is outside space. You are just trying to drive us all mad lolol.

Answer 7

You have created a rather large and invalid syllogism. A thought is a representation. You can represent absolutely nothing and it still remains nothing.

PS You have not met my argument, but have sidestepped it. And again, you confuse relativity with relativism. We represent " nothing " mathematically all the time.

PSS. Look at Liz's answer. She has taken all the nails of your invalid syllogism and pounded them down, one by one. A bit more work than I would have thought your fallacy worth.

Answer 8

The individual structures are consistent with logic forms but the specific predicates are used in a non-sensical and counter-intuitive fashion. Further, if there is meaningful logical argument hidden here, I do not see it.

Answer 9

You must like writing. No, the above does not make sense from the second line onwards - Not every thought is real. therefore the rest of you logic doesn't.

Answer 10

Yeah what Liz said. But why on earth do u need to know? You obviously just made that whole thing up so only you can know what it truly means as it is subject to interpretation, and as you wrote it, only your interpretation will be the correct one. And please, find something better to do with your time!