I'm refering to the formal side, the words that go with it and the 'rules', not when someone was 6 and realised santa didn't exist!
I've picked bits up because I've always been interested in people trying to understand argument and reasoning. I've often picked up a fraction and then used google to fill in a few gaps. My journey started in 1994 when my now husband disputed any difference between SD's and EO's (google 'em if you want!) in classical behaviourism - I thought it impossible but 2 years later I talked to my supervisor about it, he also thought it impossible but a couple of years later he mailed me an article with a note 'You might have been right'. I pondered the whole thing for about 5 years in total and in doing so I got really interested in logic.
It sure as hell wasn't taught in my school!
I can't remember learning any formal logic (other than the classical proofs of Euclidean geometry in maths) until I had to learn boolean algebra for a school "computer" project (actually a crude binary calculator) in the sixth form. I was only taught it properly as part of the university computing course.
Floppit,
It depends on your starting-point, but you may find this useful:
http://www.epistemelinks.com/Main/To...?TopiCode=Logi
And, of course, there's the old favourite, which has several useful links:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/resource.html
I always had a critical mind and an ability to ask crucial questions - however, formal courses at Uni many years ago gave more structure to my thinking.
Informal logic and philosophy of argument used to be part of the mainstream undergrad degree for Psych. This is no longer the case.
Ditto Classics, at least Aristotelian based. Again, no longer the case.Originally Posted by Dr B
Informal logic and philosophy of argument used to be part of the mainstream undergrad degree for Psych. This is no longer the case.
I have never studied formal logic, nor do I have a science background. It's difficult to pin down where I acquired such an interest in reasoning but it probably came from my job, which required me to construct reports which had to be very evidence-based and logical to justify a particular course of action.
My layman's interest in science has reinforced this approach, especially when considering the kind of issues discussed in this forum.
There is also, of course, the accumulated experience of seeing the evidence for claim after parapiffle claim systematically disproved. I have undoubtedly become more skeptical as I've grown older.
Some stuff here about the Aristotelian theory of the syllogism:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism
I have yet to learn reasoning. I do, however, have an odd 'gift' for spotting flaws in cunning plans. Unfortunately, it's not a saleable talent. Though many organisations would benefit hugely from seeing where they are going wrong, the individuals that comprise them think differently.
I'm not so sure about that. I've often been asked along to meetings specifically to act as a bullshit detector, partly because of my bluntness when confronted with an attempt to pull wool over the eyes. Admittedly this was not my primary function, as I had already been employed in a more constructive capacity.
I love those links Lord Muck! A thread of good info sites for critical thinking and logic would make a cool sticky. At the moment I have very little time to read - well, I could read now but at 6am the more meandering style of thinking suits me better. I'm reading a book on logic (or I was!) which has some brilliant quotes, ie, one liner 'ahaa' moments. Ethics suits me as well because it's problems 'feel' real world and I've got a natural curiosity for it.
I must admit I was really curious if you all went to public school and then joined the debating society at oxbridge - it's good to test out a random preconception now and again!
What hooked me personally is that I'll think about things I don't understand rather than avoid them, I'll still be pondering years later until I get it. I'm one of the few people working in the Council who will actually READ relevant legislation, if I don't get it the first time around I'll read it again - most recently the 'Mental Capacity Act'. I've done that ever since I discovered the policy writers have rarely read the bloody things, even those running courses on the subject have rarely read them. I want to see the thread that ties an idea to the real world.
When Woolworths went bust my hubby said we could go to town, poke the store with a stick and look at it's teeth - it's what you do with dead things.
Maybe skepticism arises out of frustration at the lack of natural curiosity many people show, no desire in the first place to 'see', no desire to check, no desire for detail, no tolerance for confusion until it's figured out.
Hardly!
No beard either - not now, not ever!
OI!! Hubby has a beard!Hardly!
No beard either - not now, not ever!Funny though, Oxbridge makes me think of beards (and no - he didn't go) but public school makes me think of implausibly close shaves and red cheeks. I'm quite fond of my little stereotypes!
I've been playing on the logic tutor from Lord Muck's link. I feel really, really stupid now. I think I need to play lots more!
Man, I am soooo scrrrewed.Ditto Classics, at least Aristotelian based. Again, no longer the case.
Posted by kirsty on spiritlove
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:41 pm Post subject: where did you learn reasoning
sorry had to laugh when i saw that on uks shall we al go and post on that one
Also - posted in reply by rainbows
Gulp, they're watching usLet me think about it.
_________________
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks