Re: virus: Logical beliefs

Robin Faichney (
Mon, 2 Jun 1997 10:01:00 +0100

David McF wrote:
>At 09:49 AM 30/05/97 +0100, Robin Faichney wrote:
>>I think that #1 and #4 are the standard senses in philosophical or
>>other technical contexts, though the others are in common
>>use. #2 and #3 are, IMHO, too vague for use in careful thinking.
>You are welcome to your opinion of course, but you should realize that
>you've just said that the principles of logic are too vague for
>use in careful thinking. If that's right I think we'll just have to
>agree to disagree on that point.

Just so we know what we're talking about, the definitions of
rationality in question are:

2. in accordance with the principles of logic or reason; reasonable
3. of sound mind; sane

So you think I'm against "reasonable" and "sane".

So who's being unreasonable?!?! (I won't say insane.)

There is a world of difference between believing in "the principles of
logic or reason", and viewing #2 as a good definition of rationality.
In fact, I think missing that difference is an example of irrationality
(your defn).