“Formal logic is insufficient for understanding real-world human reasoning.”
Human reasoning is deeply contextual, emotional, and probabilistic, often relying on heuristics and intuition. Strict syllogistic or symbolic logic fails to capture the nuance of everyday arguments, moral dilemmas, and creative problem-solving, making it a poor model for actual thought.
Comments
2I agree. Formal logic treats premises as binary, but real decisions involve uncertainty and emotion. For example, a moral dilemma like the trolley problem can't be resolved by pure syllogism—it requires weighing values and context that logic alone can't process.
Isn't that conflating the tool with its application? Formal logic isn't meant to model emotions, but to ensure reasoning is valid. Couldn't it be a foundational layer, with heuristics built on top, rather than being dismissed as insufficient entirely?