If we start questioning the validity of logic, will we soon be unable to trust any logical reasoning and witness the downfall of rational discourse?

[on_my_knees]

It's widely accepted that true and false and two distinct things, and that something must be either true or false. But, suppose you're eating your breakfast one morning, and it occurs to you that you do not need to believe that true and false are distinct, just because this is widely accepted.

"In fact," you think, "the only reason I believe true and false are separate and distinct is because I've been conditioned to believe this."

Now, for whatever reason, the rest of the world catches on that true and false could actually be the same thing. Would we witness the end of rational discourse?

Updates

1 y

The final verdict in 7 hours. Bonus: I will prove that unicorns exist if you follow me.

Updates

1 y

In this question, the suggestion was that the questioning of the validity of logic will inevitably lead to an inability to trust any logical reasoning, which in turn will lead to the downfall of rational discourse. This assumes without sufficient evidence that a minor action (questioning logic) will lead to a series of drastic and undesirable consequences. The flawed thinking is referred to as a slippery slope.

Tune in next time for: UNICORNS ARE REAL! 🦄

[Anonymous]

I think began with the "not my president" I joked at the time that it would spread to "not my superbowl champions" etc. And that when people didn't like the outcome of whatever, for whatever reasons, they'll just opt to ignore it's validity. In my opinion this started with the media and when it switched from reporting news to entertaining viewers. Now instead reporting and informing people seek out the news they want to hear and they listen to the news that supports thier already held beliefs. If not they dismiss it.

[on_my_knees]

Great example. "NOT my president" coexists with the President. Paraconsistent reasoning should provide a framework to resolve this paradox and thus prevent the downfall.

[Lowly_Grump]

I find the anonymous opinion of @thomastown interesting.

[on_my_knees]

Is this the downfall of rational discourse?

[Lowly_Grump]

The answer is, I would know if you asked in plain English.

[Lowly_Grump]

How to enhance my rival's perception of my hierarchical disengagement? ↗

[purplepoppy]

Your assumption is illogical because there's various degrees of true and false. Some things are very true and others very false. But often the two are blurred, for example if you look out of the window now is it raining or not? There's the odd bit of drizzle but is that really rain? Or if you do 31mph in a 30mph zone are you really speeding? If you only do anal are you still a virgin?

[on_my_knees]

False.

[Danisa]

Nah, it's why logic is mostly useless in real life and succumbs to paradox easily.

Things in reality are rarely 1 or 0, true or false.

[on_my_knees]

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

[Juxtapose]

And what would you use in its place? Faith? Hahaha 😂

[Anonymous]

Overwritten. True intellects write in plain English.

[on_my_knees]

Incorrect

[In_Trance]

Where have you been for the last 43 years?