Being Logical Amidst Illogicalities

Hi,

Being logical can be a turn-off in our political culture. I blame the high school debate kids for it. Everyone remembers recoiling each time the high school debate kid asked his audience to "riddle him this" in that self-exultant, manufactured tone (FYI: to qualify my fallacy, by "everyone" I mean everyone except the debate kid and his mom - thank you debate kid for picking up on this fallacy). My humble hypothesis is that American debate-kids did to logic what American millennials did to MySpace: they made us all sick and tired of it.

Okay, I am totally joking (besides the millennial part, right? Hilarious, Dylan. - the coffee cup). Our American culture's interaction with logic might be more complex than what I let on. To get technical, principles of logic are built into the language; language is inseparable from logic. The law of contradiction is manifestly present when you explain to grandma why you do not like the purple sweater (i.e. you assume with that statement that it is not true that you do like it). The law of identity is just as stubborn when your wife blames you for clogging the toilet (and it is equally as present when I deny it). In that sense, yes, our culture is pretty logical. Humanity, being rational animals, finds itself reasoning through problems whether they like it or not (try unclogging the garbage disposal without an instruction manual). Americans do have a grasp on this.

Therefore, a distinction is appropriate. When I speak about "being logical," I mean it in the sense of "reasoning well," not in the sense of the inevitable logic built into language. D.Q. McInerny in his book helps tease out what I mean,

"Being logical...presupposes our having a healthy respect for the firm factualness of the world in which we live...a lively awareness of how the facts that are our ideas relate to the facts that are the objects in the world, for logic is about truth" (McInerny).

Sure, one may wrangle with particularities for how his definition relates to epistemological assumptions (but McInerny is a metaphysician, so I will shut up). But this is aside the point. If we take the definition at face value, one will notice that to fulfill the rigor of the definition one cannot be a lazy thinker. It requires a lot of work to foster that "healthy respect" and "lively awareness" of the objectivity of the world around us. It requires understanding premises, conclusions, and the proper ordering of argumentation disbarring fallacious facades. The point of logic is to see reality, to work on removing the blinders to the reality of how things ought to be (it is for truth!). One does not simply get out of bed and reason with sincerity (insert Boromir meme).

In many contexts of our lives, we may be very logical. My point is that in our politics culture we lack the discipline required to foster sincere, logical thinking. We are "baby talkers" to borrow a Postman's phrase. The examples are obvious: Voting has become a lost art more concerned with gaining political prestige of a sectarian position than considering the impact of your vote on society (treating others the way you want to be treated). Political positions are more concerned with emotional appeal than constructive policy action. One of my favorites is a large faction on the Right that wants to disestablish the impact of our government in localities by active stalling and controversy for its own sake within the system (this confused position needs to explain how becoming established in government to dis-establish government is a coherent idea; this is an alteration of using the ring of power to destroy the ring of power).

Originally, my intent with the book Being Logical was to prime my mind for Trachtman's "The Tools of Argument: How the Best Lawyers Think, Argue, and Win." Legal thinking is an impending direction in my educational path that warrants sanguine pre-law preparation. Being Logical (the book) was a concise reminder of basic logic. For those versed with intermediate logic (such as truth tables, more elongated contrapositives, etc.), this book might be too simple. I dealt with most of these ideas when studying for my LSAT. This served as a reminder more than a teacher. However, for those seeking to establish a rudimentary understanding of the first principles of logic, conjunctive/disjunctive/conditional statements, categorical syllogisms, and formal/informal fallacies, this book will serve a valuable purpose.

However, as I read this book, a solemn tune arose in my chest relating to our political culture. My thoughts documented above were more concentrated and established at the conclusion.

At the turn of each page, the discomfort of having many in our political leadership so bereft of sincerity vociferously bubbled in the back of my mind. It saddens me that those whom we choose to lead us prey upon our people with (basic) logical fallacies. Is it our leaders' fault for being insincere or our peoples' fault for being emotionally driven to the disbarment of reason (or both)? Reason is distant to our politics (maybe it always was distant). Maybe we deserve this. Democratic republics will struggle to subsist without a healthy soil of rationality, and a sovereign people of laws will fall into passion and prejudice if they lack reason and virtue. I am convinced this shortcoming pervades both sides of the political aisle. Having more familiarity with the "Right-side," I am convinced it is just as strong (if not as strong) as the other side.

Weirdly, this basic logic primer left a solemn tune in my thoughts. It is a bit of a tragedy that being logical is so discouraged in politics. We may laugh at the debate kid, but maybe he yearns for something deeply lacking but seriously needed in our law-based culture? I pray for improvement in our national reasoning and, as best I can try to eschew the illogical view of national cynicism toward our relations. In the tradition of Niebuhr, I try to accept the complexity of our human existence that, due to the limitations of our reason, we will never fully comprehend. Prayer and hope in God's grace, seem the best treatment for such multiplexity.

N.B. I do not know what I am doing in these reviews anymore. I think they are more therapeutic and help me remember what I read. Thank you for joining me in therapy.

Therapy

• Yes
• Yes

z