What do you think of these books as examples of western science pre-logicality i.e Levi-Bruhl?

Question

I found these books on a yahoo answers. They are examaples of pre-logicality. Demonstrating that western science and mathemastics are pre-logical in the levi -Buhl sense. They argue that if logic is an epistemic condition of truth then logic demonstrates that mathematics and scvience are self-contradictory or meaningless. In other words in terms of the logic these discipline use as the criteria of truth there own criteria collaspes them into meaninglessness. Some wil say that so what maths and science work. Yes but the author argues this just makes how they work more of a mystery since if logic is a tool for truth this very tool demonstrates they canont be "true" as they are self contradictorory WHAT DO YOU THINK.. The author uses these case studies to argue all human thinking and products of thought entail meaninglessness or pre-logicality if logic is an epistemic condition of truth

http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/gamahucher_press_catalogue.htm

Answer 1

The real humour lies in the author not appreciating the irony of his objectives. To quote:

"This case study is to demonstrate... that all our concepts, all our categories, all our ideas, all theses, all antitheses, all epistemologies, all ethics, all ontologies, and all metaphysics, and other words all our views are meaningless."

Let's just stop right there. The view that everything is meaningless is a VIEW. The only way this can be valid is if it has a meaning. The author has immediately constructed an impossible situation. How can someone deprived of any ability to derive meaning nonetheless do so?

The author then goes on to wacky portions of science where scientists are honestly at a loss to explain what's going on and uses that to argue that science doesn't work. I note that he doesn't bother disputing the validity of, say, gravitational theory. Since this, according to the author, is just as meaningless as quantum mechanics, I would personally kindly request the author to demonstrate this by jumping off a large object.

Or, as Locke once said about people who choose to disbelieve the reality of reality: "...if our dreamer pleases to try whether the glowing heat of a glass furnace be barely a wandering imagination in a drowsy man's fancy, by putting his hand into it, he may perhaps be wakened into a certainty greater than he could wish, that it is something more than bare imagination."

You may still choose to believe it is all an accident or a miracle. I say test that theory out and see how well it works. I think you will find it doesn't work well at all.