~~~~~~~[]=¤ԅ(ˊᗜˋ* )੭ Why Axioms Are Important

in dtube •  7 years ago 


In this video I explain what Axiomatic Logic is to me and why I think it is so important.

Let me know what you think in the comments below -- I love talking about philosophy!

Follow me @shayne


▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

it's interesting Axiomatic Logic, I like philosophy, thanks sharing

I think a lot of people like you say are missing their base.

I would say Axioms are Foundational Truths or Knowledge.

Missing this stuff means by and large the current statism dilutes or filters a lot of this out of curriculum on purpose.

It dumbs people down as you know, they then can be kept in line easier by the state, who seek to control the people this way and then conform them to be puppets and order followers.

I know you know but others might not.

Thanks for stopping by my posts here and there man, it is always nice to hear from you and I always notice Shayne.

Have a good week.

I think the term "Axiomatic Logic" is kind of confusing and misleading. I prefer Rand's original "Axiomatic Concept":

An axiomatic concept is the identification of a primary fact of reality, which cannot be analyzed, i.e., reduced to other facts or broken into component parts. It is implicit in all facts and in all knowledge. It is the fundamentally given and directly perceived or experienced, which requires no proof or explanation, but on which all proofs and explanations rest.
It's good that the axioms you mention are few and because they are things which are not up for discussion, they are given. All the examples you give, while you say they may be controversial and trigger some people, are pretty safe. The danger would be in considering something which is not fundamental to be axiomatic, to not be up for discussion.

I agree with you that "relativism" is pretty problematic (especially the moral variety, you focus on the epistemological variety though) and has a lot of people confused. Your example argument, that the complete rejection of the concept of an absolute is an absolute statement, is a good one but it misses the point of the problem of a posteriori reasoning, reasoning by observation, which is that the universe imperfectly matches our observations, models and understanding. Or in other words, it's very different to say you agree there are absolutes but that it is hard to determine what they are, and to say there is no absolute.

So it's fine to say, this orange weighs 3 ounces, but that is highly probably to be not absolutely true. However that discrepancy really doesn't matter at all in this case. In others it can.

I know that a lot of people get incorrectly branded as relativists for being skeptics. I am one of those people. So I would say that I doubt you know the actual weight of that orange, but I don't deny that it has an actual weight, and I don't doubt that you can know it satisfactorily well, and more importantly usefully well. In the case of the orange anyway.