Question

I find that using logic is purely pragmatic.We use many forms of logic to conclude various things about our "world" which is through epistemology.But yet, the fallacy I find here is that we assume that the information we conclude is true. After all, if I am not sure about my existence, then how can I be sure that my experiences are real?For all I know, I might as well be a cat or even "nothing".If this is the case; when is the point through all this superficiality do we come up with the principle of logic?

Answer 1

The student's question probes the role of logic in understanding existence and validating experience, highlighting logic as an integral and normative principle for argumentation and truth-seeking in philosophy.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question deals with the foundational role of logic in human understanding and knowledge acquisition, an essential concept in epistemology and philosophy. When questioning the certainty of our existence and the nature of our experiences, we reach a point where logic is invoked as a necessary principle for thought and argument. Philosophers use logic as a methodical tool to pursue truth by developing philosophical methods and arguments. The study of reasoning allows them to evaluate beliefs and hypotheses, even in the absence of definitive empirical verification. Logic provides normative rules, such as the laws of noncontradiction and the excluded middle, which guide us in how we ought to reason. Through logical analysis, philosophers can discern consistency and deduce implications, inching closer to truth, even in abstract concepts. Thus, while we may doubt the veracity of our perceptions or the certainty of existence, logic remains a fundamental pathway through which we strive to understand and derive meaning from our world.