Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm having trouble understanding what the definition of a tautology is. I commented on a post on facebook that seems tautological to me. Given this definition:

 

 

 

A tautology (from Greek ταὐτός, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is a logical argument constructed in such a way, generally by repeating the same concept or assertion using different phrasing or terminology, that the proposition as stated is logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or valid reasoning supporting the stated conclusion.

 

 

Somebody posted this as part of their argument that praxeology doesn't have any value.

 

 

Praxeology is not empirical

 

I responded that since, by definition, praxeology is a deductive study, it is not empirical, therefore to use it as an argument against it, is a tautaology.

 

a couple people on the thread said I needed to go back to logic school.

 

I need help, thanks!

Posted

Praxeology isn't emphirical.............yet.

Posted
Praxeology isn't emphirical.............yet.

 

I have a great idea for a new car. Lets remove the cabin, two wheels, have only one more seat behind the driver who sits behind the steering wheel. Lets call this new model Car Plus. 

Posted

I have a great idea for a new car. Lets remove the cabin, two wheels, have only one more seat behind the driver who sits behind the steering wheel. Lets call this new model Car Plus. 

 

When you eat your hat how would you like it cooked?

  • 1 month later...
Posted

Tautology is a category of truth, and is also known as an analytic truth.     Words like "total" are very tautological, because how can you scientifically confirm the totality of a thing, or the totality of everything, or the totality of time?   

 

Science (empirical truth) requires basic tautological truths, because how can you make a scientific inquiry without definitions like 2+2=4, total, or even "time"?   

 

Before you can study the color red, you first need to tautologically define the color red.  How do you know red is red?   You simply identify it tautologically.  Tautologies exist only in the mind.    

 

By doing scientific inquiry with the interior tautological premises, you create a more nuanced and varied empirical landscape of the exterior.   Therefore, the tautology of "red" expands into scientific modelling of light and wave lengths and how that interacts with the eye.  

 

I'm not entirely confident that I've explained that as well as I could.  

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Tautologies are logical statements that are always true, and thereby trivial, for example: A, therefore A.

Another way to state this is: a proposition whose truth value is never F.

Posted

Because something is always true does not mean it is always trivial (unimportant).      Tautological thinking is not only inescapable and necessary, but it is also maddeningly circular.    Circular reasoning is something we all do, always.    

 

Trivial?    I'm not sure if anything is objectively and scientifically non-trivial.   Some lines of thinking are apparently more exciting than others.   

 

Evaluations of importance require circular, non scientific reasoning.   But science can certainly help determine what is of value. 

Posted

Because something is always true does not mean it is always trivial (unimportant).      Tautological thinking is not only inescapable and necessary, but it is also maddeningly circular.    Circular reasoning is something we all do, always.    

 

Trivial?    I'm not sure if anything is objectively and scientifically non-trivial.   Some lines of thinking are apparently more exciting than others.   

 

Evaluations of importance require circular, non scientific reasoning.   But science can certainly help determine what is of value. 

"trivial" in the propositional logic sense. It's been a few years, but I think it has to do with the fact that you have not actually derived anything, either inductively or deductively. 

Posted

Okay, that is a good point and that is my understanding.  Tautologies are circular assumptions (e.g., appearances appear) that are required in order to derive an analytic or empirical truth. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.