Thought-Provoking Philosophical Essays

By Vincent Xavier

This stimulating book contains many insights about human nature and society. There is also some wit and humor. However, (only) a little part of the book is devoted to proofs, theorems, lemmas, axioms, induction, set theory and the like, with quite heavy usage of mathematical symbols, which would appeal to the more mathematically inclined. It is on the whole a serious general book with appeal to the intellectual minded.

 

The author has published more than 30 books, as well as numerous scientific, mathematical and philosophical research articles, and is a professor. As a keen researcher, he has received a number of citations and commendations for his research.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Vincent Xavier
• Release date: Mar 2, 2021
• ISBN: 9781393683049

Book preview

Preface

The essays in this book are aimed at stimulating thought and mind-expansion. There are a number of original concepts, particularly in Chapters 5, 6, 8 and 9, which should be eye-openers, encouraging further intellectualization.

The book is intended to be provocative in order to inspire thought and analysis.

Happy reading, and, thinking!

Vincent Xavier, PhD

March 1, 2021

Contents

1  Use and Abuse of Logic

2  Problems with Logic and Possible Way Out

3  Morals

4  More on Morals

5  Application of Logic in Human Affairs

6  Is Logic More Powerful than Intuition?

7  Viewing and Gauging Infinity

8  Problem of Inconsistence in Logic

9  Reality

10 Amazing Maze of Logic

11 Prospects for Logic

12 Advancement through Logic

Bibliography

1  Use and Abuse of Logic

Does being logical always pay? The author has been experimenting with logic since his younger days, his teens, especially in his relations with his fellowmen, e.g., his peers, friends, associates, even strangers, all kinds of people, foolish, average and smart people, et al. In his forays or adventures in logic the author has received all kinds of reactions from other people  -  he has been appreciated, praised, scorned, rebuffed, envied, argued with, faced all kinds of different reactions from all sorts of people. The trouble is, the author has found out, not everyone could appreciate logic, i.e., pure logic, many even had their own prejudiced logic. Worse, there seem to be many kinds of logic, many kinds of ideas, concepts or opinions. Most human affairs are apparently characterized by ego, cultural bias, religious bias, motives, self interests, emotions, prejudices, preconceived ideas. It is apparently far from being a case of precision of thought (whereby, e.g., if you add one to one you would always get two). Unfortunately, most human affairs do not work out with this kind of arithmetical precision, though it would be what we apparently wish for.

The author has found out, often to his own disadvantage, that logic, even in a highly intellectual field of activities such as mathematics, does not always work fine. One might argue that the author had been having defective or faulty logic, which had resulted in rejection. But, assuredly, that is not always the case, most probably, often not the case, and, it would be wrong for the author to praise or regard his own logical capacity too highly. Life is indeed full of contradictions. For instance, if one were to be foolish, one would be scorned of course. So, one should be smart, to earn the esteem and respect of one’s fellowmen. But, when one is too smart, especially when one acts too smart, i.e., becomes a smart aleck, one could be envied, rebuffed and scorned as well. So, act average? Perhaps, acting or being average might be the safest. But, the author thinks that it is better to be natural. Ironically, a person’s potential for advancement in life is based on his apparent intelligence or smartness. So, one has to display one’s intelligence or smartness and get recognized for it in order to gain advancement or promotion. But this intelligence or smartness could just be a display, without any substance. Unfortunately, the powers-that-be, e.g., the bosses, apparently are often impressed, and, duped, by such inconsequential displays of intelligence. Many people might not have an intrinsically smart or logical intelligence, but a low animal cunning. They are comparable to those low animals which, though apparently not as intelligent as humans, are able to outwit their human opponents, e.g., escape the traps laid out for them, raid their food stores, attack and eat them, et al. In this respect, there are criminals with apparent low IQs who are able to outwit the authorities. Perhaps, these animals or criminals are intelligent in some peculiar ways. Intelligence could here be equated with logical capacity.

The author had been naïve in his younger days in believing that being logical would help to avoid or solve problems. This is true to some extent only. It is no point reasoning with people who are either not capable of reasoning or not interested in reasoning or both. He had found to his chagrin that his so-called logic had frequently fallen on deaf ears, which had made him wonder what the use of logic was. Then, there are some people who are apparently intelligent but whose ideas are different from yours. If logic or intelligence were so useful and helpful, we could expect our top officials and leaders to be the most intelligent of the lot. But, often, this is apparently not the case. In a democracy, leaders are elected. If a person were perceived as capable and trustworthy, though he might not really be so, and if he were liked, he would probably be elected as a leader. In a dictatorial or harsh regime, a leader needs not even be smart or intelligent. Those who rise to positions of power are likely to be courageous, risk-takers and ruthless, without necessarily being smart or intelligent, though it would probably help.

The problem with human relations is not that there is not enough of logic being used. There is probably a lot of logic being used by many people. But the logic is used on many different premises, with many simply wrong, many simply prejudiced, many not true at all. The brain is actually a computer whereby if one inputs garbage the output is also garbage. The author, has, e.g., come across apparently intelligent people some of whom are staunchly religious, while some others are avowed atheists, and some rather neutral or free-thinking. Is there any point to argue with the staunchly religious that God does not exist, or, the reverse with the atheist? After all, such things belong more to the spiritual than the intellect. There are all kinds of people with all kinds of interests, likes and dislikes, and their logic or thought would obviously very much revolve round these things. For example, it would be quite pointless to argue with a sports car enthusiast about the bane of fast-driving or the staunch Christian that attending church is a waste of time. Either party would probably have many reasons, many of which valid, to counter one another. Since such problems with logic are not easy to resolve, it would be necessary for the parties involved to respect each other’s ideas, thoughts or opinions and to compromise or give and take in order to achieve harmony.

Everyone should be concerned with using logic for results rather than just for the sake of being logical. Being logical or appearing logical might win the respect of one’s peers, which is likely to give one pleasure or self-esteem. But logic should be employed to achieve more positive results, e.g., for solving problems, creative work, betterment of society, et al. The important point is that logic should help to bring harmony and happiness to everyone in the community, and not conflicts, rifts and problems, the latter appearing to be more so the case. This represents a macro view of the role of logic. Societal harmony and happiness are important, as all human beings are inter-dependent. For example, if only one out of the 100 people in the community is happy while the other 99 are sad and suffering, would these sadness and suffering not affect the only happy soul? Is it not better to have 100 winners than one winner and 99 losers, e.g., in our community or society? Unfortunately, in the world today, the gap between the haves and the have-nots seems to be widening. Would it not be better to have everyone in the world living together in relative comfort, harmony, understanding, cooperation and happiness, than to have some very well-off, some not that well-off, and the others faring badly? Unfortunately, in the dog-eat-dog world of today, success seems to be often achieved at the expense of others. Of course, not every scholar, athlete or business entity could be top or number one  -  if there were a top, there has to be the lower levels, e.g., the mid-ranking and the bottom. If there is a first, there has to be a last, unless positions and other status symbols are abolished. Human logic dictates that democracy and meritocracy are ideals in a free world, but how is it that there are still so much injustices and sufferings? A democracy might not be better off than a feudal state, if it were only a guided democracy. A meritocracy might discriminate against those highly intelligent people who dislike academic studies or are unable to perform well in academic studies due to some personal problems. Our logic should be applied wisely to the solution of such very real societal problems.

So far, we have been dealing with the various areas in human activities involving logic. Evidently, we need logic to get things done, i.e., we have to be able to convince others with logic, whether in sales or business whereby we have to convince the customers with business logic, in politics or the government whereby we have to convince others of what we could do to better their lives so that they would give us their votes, the boyfriend who has to convince the girlfriend to marry him, et al. Various kinds of logic might have to be involved. Of course, emotional appeals could also be used, which are beyond the scope of logic. Our concern here should be how to use logic for results rather than just for the sake of being logical. The first important step towards achieving results with logic is clearly to use logic on people who are really capable of logical reasoning. The problem is how are we to know whether a person has a logical mind? Perhaps, we could judge such a person by his credentials, e.g., his education, his intellectual achievements, et al. Next would probably be his conversations and ideas. Then, his occupation, his manner and appearance, his family background or ancestry, his interests and hobbies, his apparent interest in things intellectual, the books he reads, and others. Unfortunately, even if the person were indeed logical, logic might not be able to convince him, for, as mentioned before, logic is variable and not something definite or encased in concrete. Evidently, highly intelligent people, people with apparent great logical capabilities often disagree or differ in thought and reason, i.e., there are apparently many kinds of logic. We should of course not be logical just for the sake of being logical, though we ourselves have first to be logical if we want others to be logical, or, reasonable. It is pointless trying to reason or use logic with a moron, a human vegetable or a brute lacking in logical prowess.

Here, the author would digress a little and touch on business logic, which is apparently an important area in human affairs. Many successful businessmen pride themselves on being smart and capable when they have achieved business success. Ironically, many business people are not academic star-performers, being quite the reverse, giving the impression of being dull or lacking in intelligence, and hence, by association, lacking in logical capacity. On the other hand, many successful businessmen have been credited with good qualities such as foresight, shrewdness, intelligence and, of course, luck. As compared to the academic or intellectual sphere, where a kind of more abstract intelligence (some call it intellect) is needed, businesses require a more practical kind of intelligence, basically an intelligence in understanding human psychology, motivation and behavior, i.e., emotional intelligence (EQ), a relatively new terminology now being frequently used. It is apparent now that emotional intelligence is as important, if not more important, than academic intelligence, which is that intellectual capacity required for doing well in intellectual pursuits. What is business logic precisely? A successful businessman has to understand what the customers really want or need  -  price (low price, free gifts?), place (convenience of purchase?), promotion (pull and push tactics, e.g., advertising to create awareness and attract attention of customers, sales promotion to coerce customers to purchase) and product (good product features/quality?)  -  these are known as the four Ps in marketing terminology. At the same time he has to understand how his competitors and the other aspects of the environment, e.g.,