What do you think of this quote?

Question

"Logic (and therefore probability as a branch of logic) is not concerned with what men do believe, but what they ought to believe, if they are to believe correctly."(John Venn)
Do you think the quote is stating such an obvious fact that it does not merit repeating, or do you think it is stating an obvious fact that is commonly overlooked, and therefore, it merits repeating?
Setting aside the issue of whether or not the quote deserves repeating, does the conclusion of the quote effect the way you think about some of the more controversial issue we face today?

The quote was retrieved from: http://www.focusdep.com/quotes/authors/John/Venn

Answer 1

Logic is ,what's valid, what's invalid, what can be proven and argued. When we question logic and put what we find into our daily lives, it helps us not to make the same stupid mistakes over and over again.
The quote doesn't matter if it is stating an obvious fact, what is important, is, if we are philosophers, and that statement make us question, think, search for the truth, it is a good thing.

If a person states something we know to be wrong, it makes us think about the way they are seeing it, we will look closely at what is said, and although it had no truth in it, we searched and found our own truth. We won't always be satisfied with what we found, so any statement, takes us on a journey.

I love quotes such as this. The wonderful thing about philosophy, is the search will go on for as long as we live, because we will be constantly be looking at what we know, and readjusting our understanding of it.

Another quote I like on logic, comes from,

Through The looking Glass...

"Contrariwise, if it was so it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic"


Good question Bud#21 keep them coming!

Happy Easter Holiday, Cassandra

Answer 2

In logic, we do understand that knowledge gained is not what we ought to believe, but it is what we experience. Knowledge therefore, in this sense, is empirical.
I would take your second instance that this quote is stating a fact that is commonly overlooked, and thus, it merits repeating.There may be an infinite number of experiences relevant to the verifications of observations at its best probability but seldomly established.
One great example is US' invasion over Iraq. How low does the US government have to ignore the disturbing liabilities as outcome, and yet keep going on and on that its plight is promoting common good and interest as effectual to mass and media? People are dying; outbreaking,despicable news are always in the mainstream of the tabloids and magazines.
Hasn't the government verified the outcome longtime yet from this experience?. It doesn't make sense.

Answer 3

I do not think it is stating an obvious fact, I think it is an opinion that suggests that beliefs must be based on logic in order to be correct. Also I think it does merit repeating just to get people thinking about science vs. religion.

Although I suspect many people like me will have thought about this a long time ago. Personally I think beliefs can be correct without logic because logic is based on facts and facts are sometimes incorrect and sometimes missing leaving lots of room for speculation. So no, it does not change the way I think.

Answer 4

I have to say that this quote is invalid to me. The fact we have such a powerful mind is to defy logic and reason, it is the resaon we have emotion and feelings. If we were to let our lives be ruled by logic, the where is the fun, love or even the daily routine of talking with others, logic defies what makes us human, and yes I do understanf logic plays a huge part in the owrld but it is nt a religion or higer power so to have it as a believe system would be ironically illogical.

Answer 5

This is an obvious fact when you are presented with it, and you understand what philosophy is all about. I believe this is a true statement, and yet overlooked, because despite its correct nature, it tells us nothing of immediate importance. There are many people who would go through their lives believing what they do based upon their own experiences and not caring whether or not they are correct themselves. True logic is the compilation of correct choices, however, this does not make me change my opinion on any contraversial issues known today. Why would it? All this quote does is define logic, not tell which religion is right, or whether abortion is killing, etc.

Answer 6

The concluding part of the quote does invite to illuminate with rational thought the region of our mind that when we believe in something we guard most fervently and audaciously, often without questioning. In my view the ability to question ones own beliefs is not only a virtue in that belief system that it has allowed to believer to scrutinise, this ability is also perhaps at the peak of human rational awareness to the mind. When we believe in something we often attempt to define through our beliefs what we cannot observe directly scientifically and therefore prove that something is correct as a belief. The most fundamental intellectual questions about spirituality aspects of human mind, for example, the possibility of life-after-death, which in a certain belief would be a certainty, and that the existence of God as the supreme creator of everything cannot answered intellectually. We therefore find ourselves helpless; once we enter into a belief system we find no reasoning or logic to get us out, and therefore to see if we can find something better to believe in. If is said the presence of a single object in sight elevated by our need for elevation in through a belief can prove to be fallacious.

We cannot have a logical debate about things that are not in the grasp of our rational mind, but we can also debate about things that however are not in our grasp but are one way or the other in the reaches of our mind; things that we can rational or intellectually experience or find ourselves in a need to experience. The fact about life is that it is a question. We do not know where life came from, and still where does it come from, and then where does it go; what is our final destination; what is reason of all the sufferings we endure in life; and is there any final explanation of the fact that we are. I think logic does recognise the spiritual needs of human mind, and the consequent dilemmas that it face in terms of these questions that we often ask. The capacity of our mind to explore beyond most obviously physical are undeniable; we must believe in life in one form of the other otherwise the great void of unknown all around us will always remains to constantly remind us of the inadequacy and insufficiencies of all that we know.

This beautiful quote where, I my view, admits human need to believe in something superior, also attempts to kindle thoughts whereby one can cast doubts, ask question and scrutinise what other would have been a blind faith in something. In the world today we are coming closer from our various cultural, religious and social customs, beliefs and values. We see that other people can be very different from us in terms of what they believe in alone. Now, if human nature is the same everywhere then the correctness of belief should also be a singular issue. If we cannot believe in what other believe then we at least can see if we can appreciate, or if we can find similarities. This can only happen if our faith induced by certain belief system is alive and not dogmatically dead and unknown.

Answer 7

It is illogical for man to believe correctly if the focus is on what they ought to believe. There is no rhyme or reason when it comes to belief. Man will always be divided when it comes to what they believe in.

It is obvious that, John Venn proved his quote to some People. Apparantly, when it came to logic, those who thought we ought to believe in his statement, believed it, correctly. The power of persuasion from one quote leads one to believe in its words. Ironic, isn't it?

Answer 8

The problem with the quote seems to be a reduction of what should believed to that which is logical. Further, logic remained under-defined as "probability": and the conditions for its possibility of both logic and probability are not presented. Can the evidence for belief be manifested in paradox, in that which resists the catagories of logic and probability, and can this paradox be itself convincing and indicative of truth? It is my impression that this statement is hamstrung on the pre-occupation of modernity with certitude as a pre-condtion for belief, and with a prejudice that favors a universal "reason" or all encompassing governing rationality as a necessity for the legitimacy of thoughtful inquiry. Both assumptions have created much mischief in modern philosophy and culture. On questions of belief, I find Cardinal Newman's understanding of the "illative sense" to be far more illuminating-- because it allows for a far more dynamic play between reason and faith, logic and paradox, probability and mystery in terms of the judgements of belief.

Answer 9

In answer to your first question: Neither. The opinion as to what men ought to believe is subjective. Who is authorised to make the decision on what men ought to believe and what is correct in a circumstance which requires belief rather than proof? The person presenting a logical argument, if it is based on what, in their opinion, men OUGHT to believe, is likely to have their argument picked apart if men believe differently. Surely it is better to base logic on an established common ground of what is actually believed?

The conclusion of the quote therefore does not affect the way I think about current controversial issues.

Answer 10

I havent heard this quote before, but this is very impressive. In my view, this one caught the essence of what the logic or reasoning is .

I dare to apply this quote to the controversial issue, " the evolution theory"

my private opinon is that the evolution theory is the combination of the observation and the imagination.

and the bridge between them is logic.

chimpange and human have more than 90% 0f common genes. ( the observation)

So we can imagine human can be evolved from chimpange.( the imagination)

the function of logic in this case is that logic makes scientists believe
what they ought to believe , "humans evolved from chimpange" thats logocal conclusion from the observation.

The impressive part of this quote is that logic has something with our belief.

In essence , the logic is not cold , lonely thing that has nothing with our imagination or belief.

I THINK ITS CORRECT.