Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00712)

Tom:
>Although there may be all kinds of room for debate about the truth of 
>the premises, I see no room for debate about the conclusion, assuming 
>the premises are true.  Unless my logic is mistaken, ...

No, I wouldn't say that your logic is mistaken.  Rather, I would
say that your premise is flawed.  "It is simple to show who is being 
logical and who isn't" is a flawed conclusion that you reached from
equally flawed premises or assumptions.  Fact is, its devilishly
hard, if not impossible in many cases, to tell who is "logical"
and who isn't.  We seldom work with the same rules.  Any argument 
that begins with wrong assumptions is doomed to appear as flawed 
logic, even though it stands the tests of logic and reason--the 
conclusions derived are only as good as the assumptions (garbage in 
equals garbage out, and so on).  You say, "I see no room for debate 
about the conclusion, assuming the premises are true."  And my
response is, Ah, but how do you know for a fact that your premises
are true?  Except for general agreement (which counts for nothing
insofar as Truth is concerned) and experience (which always tends
to confirm our beliefs) how can anyone know for sure?  

Jerry S.
Member, TI