Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Dr. Cody Newman

Quote by Dr. Cody Newman

“No supporter of reason and logic, no one convinced by reason and logic, would ever say, “You know what, it’s irrational and illogical to go all the way to absolute rationality and logic. We ought to stop at 87.3% of absolute rationality and logic. That would of course be an arbitrary, hence irrational and illogical, stance. Once you have embarked upon the road of reason and logic, you must go all the way to 100% reason and logic since there is no reason or logic why you wouldn’t.”

Quote by Dr. Cody Newman

Book:The Ontological Self: The Ontological Mathematics of Consciousness
Create image

Work

The Ontological Self: The Ontological Mathematics of Consciousness

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Dr. Cody Newman

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Dr. Cody Newman. more

You May Also Like

“Logic, reason, and common sense are your best tools for synthesizing reality and understanding what to do about it. Be wary of relying on anything else. Unfortunately, numerous tests by psychologists show that the majority of people follow the lower-level path most of the time, which leads to inferior decisions without their realizing it. As Carl Jung put it, “Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.” It’s even more important that decision making be evidence-based and logical when groups of people are working together. If it’s not, the process will inevitably be dominated by the most powerful rather than the most insightful participants, which is not only unfair but suboptimal. Successful organizations have cultures in which evidence-based decision making is the norm rather than the exception.”

ReasonDecisionEvidenceLogicCommon SenseRelyUnconscious
Book:Principles: Life and Work
Create image

“A proof represents a logical process which has come to a definitive conclusion in a finite number of stages. However, a logical machine following definite rules need never come to a conclusion. It may go on grinding through different stages without ever coming to a stop, either by describing a pattern of activity of continually increasing complexity, or by going into a repetitive process like the end of a chess game in which there is a continuing cycle of perpetual check. This occurs in the case of some of the paradoxes of Cantor and Russell. Let us consider the class of all classes which are not members of themselves. Is this class a member of itself? If it is, it is certainly not a member of itself; and if it is not, it is equally certainly a member of itself. A machine to answer this question would give the successive temporary answers: “yes,” “no,” “yes,” “no,” and so on, and would never come to equilibrium. Bertrand Russell’s solution of his own paradoxes was to affix to every statement a quantity, the so-called type, which serves to distinguish between what seems to be formally the same statement, according to the character of the objects with which it concerns itself—whether these are “things,” in the simplest sense, classes of “things,” classes of classes of “things,” etc. The method by which we resolve the paradoxes is also to attach a parameter to each statement, this parameter being the time at which it is asserted. In both cases, we introduce what we may call a parameter of uniformization, to resolve an ambiguity which is simply due to its neglect.”

LogicParadox
Book:Cybernetics: or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine
Create image