Well, given that I’ve been having lots of discussions about laws of logic, I figured I could make a poll on it. Are the laws of logic a priori , a posteriori or neither ?
-
I’m referring to the law of identity, law of non-contradiction and law of excluded middle.
I think there's a false dichotomy in the poll question, because in a way we use the logical laws we do because that's how the universe seemed to work. However, they're existence begins and ends with our definitions of them.
-
-
I agree the definitions are contingent on us (all definitions are).From your first sentence , it seems we agree on the topic as well. The motivation for the question is that people tend to start from different level of abstraction, which leads both sides disagreements.
-
To disagreement*
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.