04.21.09

Nietzschean logic

Posted in Science & Religion at 2:37 pm by nemo

Bleak conclusions

In an earlier post I lamented the apparent extinction of what I called “Nietzsche atheists,” by which I meant atheists with the courage and honesty to accept the bleak conclusions logically compelled by their premises.

3 Comments »

  1. James said,

    April 21, 2009 at 2:45 pm

    These discussions are mostly useless given that neither side can provide a coherent and adequate definition of the “natural world.”

  2. Stephen P. Smith said,

    April 21, 2009 at 9:25 pm

    Deductive logic is all about “conclusions logically compelled by their premises.” However, human logic is not contained by deductive thinking. There is also induction which grounds said premises. Moreover, there must also be a way to resolve deduction with its induction. C.S. Peirce also included abduction, which has to do with forming hypotheses, and there was for Peirce no mention of “bleak conclusions.” What Peirce gave us were the apparent three-worlds (deduction, induction and abduction), which he then described as a “neglected proof for the existence of God.”

  3. Darwiniana » Comment on Nietzschean logic said,

    April 22, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    [...] Comment on Nietzschean logic Stephen P. Smith said, April 21, 2009 at 9:25 pm Deductive logic is all about “conclusions logically compelled by their premises.” However, human logic is not contained by deductive thinking. There is also induction which grounds said premises. Moreover, there must also be a way to resolve deduction with its induction. C.S. Peirce also included abduction, which has to do with forming hypotheses, and there was for Peirce no mention of “bleak conclusions.” What Peirce gave us were the apparent three-worlds (deduction, induction and abduction), which he then described as a “neglected proof for the existence of God.” [...]

Leave a Comment