My own interpretation of the quote above: The quote, by J.w. Krutch, suggests that logic in a sense does not exist but rather it is an idea or term that has a sense of confidence attached to it and therefore is believed to be logical and true. This logic may in, some cases actually be wrong, however the amount of legitamancy it is believed to have or the amount of confidence a society has about its accuracy makes the statement a logical one.
On the other hand, All logic was formed some way or another in order to progress as a society and create a system in which all can function. We must have some boundaries in order to survive and though this logic is quite possibly false, it is infact true because the society makes it true. A statement, in my opinion, can still be true if it is wrong because the society has accepted it as true and have functioned around it.
In my opinion it is very possibly that all logic is in fact false but we must accept it in order to progress as a human race. For example the Euclid logic asked us to simply accept certain logic in order to move forward in understanding Geometry however how can we ever truly know if what Euclid told us is true? We cant and therefor logic is often times ( or at least possibly) actually false however our society has built around such logic which in a way makes the logic in fact true.
I generally agree with the points you make in your last paragraph, although don't we have to draw the line at a certain point? If the individual decides to accept any statement that most people accept, then won't our society be completely ruled by the majority? What if they minority is correct, and their point of view would allow us to progress as a society?
ReplyDelete