Quotessence
Home / Topics / Logical Thinking Quotes

Logical Thinking Quotes

Browse 149 quotes about Logical Thinking.

Logical Thinking Quotes

“You can't always expect people to apply your wisdom when they didn't use wisdom before they found themselves knee deep in their version of justice.”

“Humankind’s struggle against a hostile environment causes people throughout the ages to deploy their full armory of logic, training, strategy, imagination, inventiveness, and creativity. We are born with the natural ability to strategize. The most influential tool in humankind’s intellectual tool kit is the ability to regenerate a sense of unruffled alertness, to establish a poised stance that leads to intuitive discoveries generated by the conscious and unconscious mind constantly filtering a plethora of data, selecting critical facts, and producing elegant solutions to seemingly insoluble dilemmas.”

“Water has to be the right temperature, For it to appease our human thirst. Too cold, it'll give you frost-bite, Too hot, and it'll burn your throat. Intellect has to be rightly moderated, For it to push mind and society upward. Too little, it facilitates superstition, Too much, and it turns the mind cold.”

“The wellbeing of the heart of humanity does not rely on practicality, logicality and factuality alone. Fiction is needed, placebo is needed, and you know what else is needed - a whole lot of impractical and absurd unselfishness.”

“Recently I am so much in to numbers, equations & scientific facts! I learned how to link logic to reason, and to be honest sometimes I couldn't, simply because logic is not stander defined, it defers from one to another (it is the science of reasoning), that made me think deeply about life, what is the real reason behind all the unbelievable stories in my life, how can I discover the logic behind what is happening behind the scene! Then it hit me, I discovered that everything is supernaturally working in harmony to serve me at the end, no matter how hard it felt ! I was granted hope in different ways, only in the mysterious equations of love that any logic or reasons can be found, Because of the only logic I found I am able to be alive now! Amazing how God love us, yet we are so blind to see it, because we accept blessings as a given right!”

“[One way] researchers sometimes evaluate people's judgments is to compare those judgments with those of more mature or experienced individuals. This method has its limitations too, because mature or experienced individuals are sometimes so set in their ways that they can't properly evaluate new or unique conditions or adopt new approaches to solving problems.”

“What is Truth (The Sonnet) There is not one but two truths, truth of facts and truth of good. Truth of facts is worth the honor, when it serves the truth of good. Truth of facts thrives on logic, an effective antidote to prejudice. Where it sucks the sweetness of life, truth of facts is carrier of malice. Truth of facts is carrier of logic, Truth of good is carrier of life. Often times they cohabit the mind, sometimes facts only undermine life. Pride of truth is the good it does, without which all facts are futile. Truth of good is truth absolute, absence of heart makes logic vile.”

“There is not one but two truths, truth of facts and truth of good. Truth of facts is worth the honor, when it serves the truth of good. Pride of truth is the good it does, without which all facts are futile. Truth of good is truth absolute, absence of heart makes logic vile.”

“Origin of the Logical. Where has logic originated in men’s heads? Undoubtedly out of the illogical, the domain of which must originally have been immense. But numberless beings who reasoned otherwise than we do at present, perished; albeit that they may have come nearer to truth than we! Whoever, for example, could not discern the "like" often enough with regard to food, and with regard to animals dangerous to him, whoever, therefore, deduced too slowly, or was too circumspect in his deductions, had smaller probability of survival than he who in all similar cases immediately divined the equality. The preponderating inclination, however, to deal with the similar as the equal - an illogical inclination, for there is no thing equal in itself - first created the whole basis of logic. It was just so (in order that the conception of substance should originate, this being indispensable to logic, although in the strictest sense nothing actual corresponds to it) that for a long period the changing process in things had to be overlooked, and remain unperceived; the beings not seeing correctly had an advantage over those who saw everything "in flux." In itself every high degree of circumspection in conclusions, every sceptical inclination, is a great danger to life. No living being might have been preserved unless the contrary inclination - to affirm rather than suspend judgment, to mistake and fabricate rather than wait, to assent rather than deny, to decide rather than be in the right - had been cultivated with extraordinary assiduity. - The course of logical thought and reasoning in our modern brain corresponds to a process and struggle of impulses, which singly and in themselves are all very illogical and unjust; we experience usually only the result of the struggle, so rapidly and secretly does this primitive mechanism now operate in us.”

“Pragmatism, by its very name, poses above all as a 'pholosophy of action'; its more or less avowed assumption is that man only has needs of a practical order, material ones and, together with these, sentimental ones. It means, then, the doing away with intellectuality; but, if this is so, why go on wanting to evolve theories? That is rather hard to understand; and if pragmatism, like skepticism, which it only differs from with regard to action, wished to conform to its own standards, it would have to limit itself to a mere mental attitude, which it cannot even seek to justify logically without giving itself the lie; but there is no doubt that it is very difficult to keep strictly within such bounds.”

“Contrary to the standard caricature of philosophers as inveterate skeptics who have no truck with religion, among philosophers the view that the existence of God can be rationally demonstrated “enjoyed wide currency, if not hegemony . . . from classical antiquity until well after the dawn of modernity” (to quote the philosopher David Conway, writing in a book that had a major influence on Flew’s conversion to philosophical theism); and the suggestion that human reason can be accounted for in purely materialistic terms has, historically speaking, been regarded by most philosophers as a logical absurdity, a demonstrable falsehood.”

“The possibility of the existence of such a thing as "science" rests on a variety of presuppositions that neither can themselves be subjected to a "scientific" examination, nor do they provide any rational basis for giving said "science" the authority of the last word not only on general questions of human existence, but even in the specialized field of each particular scientific area. Just to give an basic example, without the words "yes" and "no", logical reasoning is not possible. No science can tell us what they mean. All formal logic is based on these two words, and formal logic itself cannot define them.”

“The materialistic atheist can’t have laws of logic. He believes that everything that exists is material—part of the physical world. But laws of logic are not physical. You can’t stub your toe on a law of logic. Laws of logic cannot exist in the atheist’s world, yet he uses them to try to reason. This is inconsistent. [...] The atheist’s view cannot be rational because he uses things (laws of logic) that cannot exist according to his profession. The debate over the existence of God is a bit like a debate over the existence of air.3 Can you imagine someone arguing that air doesn’t actually exist? He would offer seemingly excellent “proofs” against the existence of air, while simultaneously breathing air and expecting that we can hear his words as the sound is transmitted through the air. In order for us to hear and understand his claim, it would have to be wrong. Likewise, the atheist, in arguing that God does not exist must use laws of logic that only make sense if God does exist. In order for his argument to make sense, it would have to be wrong.”

“Selbstverständlich kann diese Oeuvre wie jede andere Konklusion an seinem Fundament, den einzelnen Morphemen und in allerlei Hinsicht der Sprache attackiert werden. Sobald wir ein Argument als valide deklarieren, kann die Rechtmäßigkeit nur noch durch die Falschheit der Prämissen kollabieren. Rechtmäßigkeit kann immer durch eine Divergenz im Verständnis einzelner Definitionen angezweifelt werden. Die Definitionen, die wir bestimmten Schlüsselwörter geben, machen meist den Unterschied zwischen verschiedenen Weltanschauungen.”

“I am yet to find a happy computer, despite being the epitome of rationality. Likewise, I am yet to find a civilized animal, despite being the epitome of sentimentality. What this means is that, only with the right balance between rationality and sentimentality there can exist a magical creature called human, brimming with infinite potential - but mess up the balance, and you are stuck with either a cold mechanical world run by rationality or a red-hot uncivilized world run by brutality - both equally unfit for preserving civilized life.”