Is Truth supposed to be logical?

[JohnDoeLS]

Is Truth supposed to be logical? For right and wrong, factual correctness is defined by a standard. Does it make sense? Does your mind see the bridge of connections for why? What if the Truth was illogical as the rest of the world?  Truth means facts. Things that are true to counter mysticism and baseless things, that was it’s purpose back in 600 BC when it was first established, and of course, still so now. But what is considered to be the truth? Is it something that is factual or something that is sensible? Let’s put it in a context so we can establish a proper standard for right and wrong. If one were to kill someone and take his resources for the necessity of his own survival, is it right or wrong? Does Truth cover that? What is rightfully considered to be the logical thing to do or the RIGHT thing to do?

[dimreepr]

Axioms are true/fact, "the right thing to do" is subjective and depends on context.

[JohnDoeLS]

18 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Axioms are true/fact, "the right thing to do" is subjective and depends on context.

Is there no truth to a decision one makes? Can one say definitively that a morally questionable decision that was made to be right by a universal standard? 

[dimreepr]

32 minutes ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Can one say definitively that a morally questionable decision that was made to be right by a universal standard? 

 

Yes, hate will always make more hate.

36 minutes ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Is there no truth to a decision one makes?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a hippy, but the truth you seek is love; or at least a facsimile there of.

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Truth means facts.

I don't agree with this, although it should be true. Unfortunately, what most people think of as Truth is very subjective, and not factual at all.

Also, I don't agree with your use of "logic", as in "illogical as the rest of the world". Logic shouldn't be defined as "something that makes sense to me".

[JohnDoeLS]

Just now, Phi for All said:

I don't agree with this, although it should be true. Unfortunately, what most people think of as Truth is very subjective, and not factual at all.

Also, I don't agree with your use of "logic", as in "illogical as the rest of the world". Logic shouldn't be defined as "something that makes sense to me".

Truth should be logic, something that can definitively prove to be correct, but one can say that not everything in this world is as we perceived or other things to doubt our reality. But that's another question, assuming everything is real, there is a factual truth to things, it still remained; is truth supposed to be logical? I don't just think truths are just facts, what is true is simply true, the Earth is round, that is true and it's a fact. I am sure, by context, what is true to others may differ but my question is, are there facts, definitive answers to moral quandaries? Or, a truth to existence? Which might also be illogical? 

Also when I said illogical as the rest of the world, that admittedly wasn't developed enough. I think life is illogical, why are we alive when we are bound to die? Why did existence come to being? There is no logic to life and existence, and logic, in this case, is the standard of the end point, what is the end point? I should eat so I can live, I eat good food so I am happy. When I am happy, I feel good and then I can pass down my genes to my children. Then the cycle continues. Of course, life is much more complicated than that, the point is, the end goal is to live life, and perhaps everyone has a different end point for themselves but what is it that they want it? I can say definitively it's because of emotional fulfilment, but what is the point of that in the grand scheme of things? Yes, it's also definitive that it is irrelevant to that person if they don't ask the question, but their existence is still quite meaningless in the view of the world. 

We are all working to keep this society going, to make sure there is progress. We humans all have a part to play to keep the cogs moving, and the question remains: why? Since there is no end point other than constant emotional fulfilment, there is no logic to doing this, not seeking the end point would also mean not wanting to seek progress, since mankind wants to progress then there should be an end point, and if there is an end point, what is the point of that end point? And if there is no end point then what is the purpose of seeking an end point? 

 

9 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Yes, hate will always make more hate.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a hippy, but the truth you seek is love; or at least a facsimile there of.

Love can produce malice as well. Hate can produce goodness too. 

[dimreepr]

11 minutes ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Love can produce malice as well. Hate can produce goodness too. 

 

You're going to have to explain; doesn't seem logical to me...

[JohnDoeLS]

28 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

You're going to have to explain; doesn't seem logical to me...

Say, extreme nationalism, a love for their country, it produces xenophobia and sometimes racism, in the case of the Nazis, their love of the idea of a pure race, of the Aryan. A criminal's love for his family, thereby using it to justify their actions. A love of a person mindlessly, ignoring the evil they might have done, a mindless devotion. Hate can be a drive and if someone hates an unfair government, they use that hate as a drive to achieve overthrowing, if they hate the way they are being treated, they fight back. Both are a drive that can lead to both good and bad conclusion. 

Edited August 4, 2017 by JohnDoeLS

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Say, extreme nationalism, a love for their country, it produces xenophobia and sometimes racism, in the case of the Nazis, their love of the idea of a pure race, of the German people. A criminal's love for his family, thereby using it to justify their actions. A love of a person mindlessly, ignoring the evil they might have done, a mindless devotion. Hate can be a drive and if someone hates an unfair government, they use that hate as a drive to achieve overthrowing, if they hate the way they are being treated, they fight back. Both are a drive that can lead to both good and bad conclusion. 

That explains how hate loves to hate. 

Edited August 4, 2017 by dimreepr

[JohnDoeLS]

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That explains how hate loves to hate. 

A mindless love for an evil person is not that, it's love as well but evil is not necessary to hate. 

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, JohnDoeLS said:

A mindless love for an evil person is not that, it's love as well but evil is not necessary to hate. 

Mindless, yes, but who mentioned evil and why?

[JohnDoeLS]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Mindless, yes, but who mentioned evil and why?

Evil is malice, to prove the point that love can indeed produce malice through their participation with the evil that they love. 

[dimreepr]

Just now, JohnDoeLS said:

Evil is malice, to prove the point that love can indeed produce malice through their participation with the evil that they love. 

Well, then you don't understand the word love. 

[JohnDoeLS]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Well, then you don't understand the word love. 

a strong feeling of affection.

a great interest and pleasure in something.

[dimreepr]

Context, it seems, is everything.

[JohnDoeLS]

5 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Context, it seems, is everything.

Well, I can't discuss properly with you if you won't develop. 

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Axioms are true/fact, "the right thing to do" is subjective and depends on context.

 

1 minute ago, JohnDoeLS said:

Well, I can't discuss properly with you if you won't develop. 

Did I need too?

[JohnDoeLS]

Just now, dimreepr said:

 

Did I need too?

 

Yes. You told me truth means to love and I followed that love can produce malice and hate can produce goodness then you told me I don't understand love. I am not sure what you are saying when you quote your axiom statement, I do not follow. 

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, JohnDoeLS said:

 I do not follow. 

 

Clearly. 

[JohnDoeLS]

2 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Clearly. 

You win. I can't beat just plain dismissing. Wait, are you trolling me?

Edited August 4, 2017 by JohnDoeLS

[Evgenia]

Thank you. You made me smile.

I didn't have enough of positive things recently.To find out the discussion of essense of love in the topic about logics at the science forum is a really lovely gift.

Logics is a science to find a truth with a help of valid arguments. Therefore truth as a "product" of logics is logical.

By the way,love as a very important feeling of sensual experience should be a matter of science of the other type, but i don't know any of such a type...Do you? Sexology no, psychology no, biology no...

[dimreepr]

Just now, JohnDoeLS said:

You win. 

I don't want to win, I want to learn.

[JohnDoeLS]

12 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I don't want to win, I want to learn.

Great. Was that one-word reply part of that intention? I do not follow. 

Edited August 4, 2017 by JohnDoeLS

[dimreepr]

In my mind, the only way to defeat hate is love, not the love of hate, but the opposite of hate. If you punch me and I choose to smile back, that's love, not hate, you may choose to punch me again, that's your choice, but everyone else will see you as the arsehole.

[JohnDoeLS]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

In my mind, the only way to defeat hate is love, not the love of hate, but the opposite of hate. If you punch me and I choose to smile back, that's love, not hate, you may choose to punch me again, that's your choice, but everyone else will see you as the arsehole.

But isn't your contention that I do not understand love? And, if you were punched, choosing to smile back can be a reaction but if no one else saw it, no one would have an opinion of it, and punching you multiple time while you are smiling really doesn't add anything to the love/hate equation because there must be a reason this person in question is punching you, would it not be better to resolve it than to just keep smiling? Of course, this is part of the context and you just told me how love is truth yet I have shown you how love can be used to participate in evil to produce malice so I am not getting a well-developed answer on the subject.