Formal Logic

To what extent can we use formal logic in the real world?What purpose does it serve? What applications do you use regularly, or do you think you should use more frequently? Reflect and consider an application of real world logic that you have observed. 

Formal logic involves making deductive statements from two (rarely, could be more) given premises. They are syllogisms that are used almost everyday during a simple conversation or an argument. It helps us to derive at conclusions about almost everything in this world. For example, you could be gossiping with your friends about some new guy in the campus and the formal logic example would include: 

              -New guys are quite shy 

              -He is a new guy

              -Therefore, he is quite shy. 

The statement above may not be necessarily true because unless you record the movements of the new guy you would not know whether he is shy or an extrovert. However, such syllogisms become a part of our daily life. If you are having an  argument with a friend you would use formal logic. For example, when your friend and yourself are discussing about the Taliban activities and you are against them. You would say: - Those who kill innocent people should be executed. 

                 - The Taliban kills innocent people

                 - Therefore, the Taliban should be executed. 

This would be a valid statement because you know the activities of the Taliban and have evidence to support your statements. 

Many people use the 'Appeal to Authority' fallacy in real world examples. Most of us would want to believe only those in power. If the United Nations Secretary General gives statistics they must be true and no one can challenge them. However, the statistics shown could be challenged. When the Millennium Development Goals report came out the statistics showed improvement however there was hardly any. 

                        

Manufacturing Dissent - Language

The Manufacturing Dissent ends with Noam Chomsky saying, "The question, in brief, is whether democracy and freedom are values to be preserved or threats to be avoided [as they have been until now]. In this possibly terminal phase of human existence, democracy and freedom are ... essential to survival." So what does this mean? Human existence, democracy and freedom – how are they inter-connected?

Human existence is connected to freedom because without freedom, humans are just like any other controlled, non-living thing. Democracy is to freedom because the people get the right – the freedom to choose their leaders and the freedom of speech to express their opinions towards the running of country. History has often showed us that hegemonies can cause lots of unrest – both violent to the country and violent psychologically for the population of the country.

There have been major revolutions in the past two years. Countries that have been under the rules of dictator want their democracy – their freedom. Egypt saw the stepping down of Hosni Mubarak, Libya saw the abdication and death of Muhammad Gaddafi and Syria is plunging into the worse of revolutions, day by day.

So what causes all these uprisings? Because of discontent amongst people. People fail to express themselves externally, which would bitter them internally to a level that would lead to an outrageous eruption. It is normal for any person to feel in such a way. If there is no means of communication, no language to express the hurt or anger, then it all accumulates inside the brain and heart and when this feeling reaches its peak – it erupts like hot lava from an active volcano. The language or the way of expressing that comes out at that time is full of agony, foul words, and inauspicious and dangerous symbolisms. To other civilized countries, the revolts may seem a portrayal of hooliganism. Or the leaders may seem like complete tyrants. But, that is what the media shows them. Unless they themselves have not seen the happenings, they cannot judge the situation and the people’s decisions by the media. The reason being that media can be very manipulative of the thoughts or the decisions that public is forming. Sometimes what we watch, see, hear in the news becomes correct to us, eventhough in reality it is far from the truth.

Media is meant to enlighten people about the truths of life – the daily happenings, morals, important messages and everything that gives knowledge. The media does enlighten us; but with knowledge that is many a times not real. In his movie, the Manufacturing Consent, Noam Chomsky describes how the media is controlled; the media does not present the truth – leading the population to forming wrong opinions. According to him, the media is a form of indoctrination.

Indoctrination is the persuasion to believe completely in a particular thing. It is a form of propaganda. The Nazi’s used indoctrination to convince the people of Germany that they were taking the correct measures and could not possibly go wrong in their decisions. The Nazi’s were dictators. Propaganda is often termed to a weapon for the dictators. “Propaganda is to democracy what violence is to dictatorship” Chomsky suggests. I agree because propaganda forces people to believe and give up their freedom to think and create opinions by themselves. It is blocking their form of communication – their language that they possess in their thoughts. The language that the propaganda uses, reflects the hegemony of persuasive language over the language of thoughts. It can portray the worse to come in a way that the population would believe it and see it more socially correct or at times a little more positively. They would use euphemisms. For example, the secret police would be shown as the ‘protectors’ of the country. This would make the public believe that they are there to protect them, whereas their real motive is to detain certain opposition parties. The indoctrination hinders the ability to think for the people to actually dissent. Language at this point, is absolutely zero because humans are just the ‘working machines’ operating in a manufacturing company, with complete dominance of working the way the controller wants.

Chomsky suggests that “humans are blinded by faith and not reason” and that ““Future society” – should be seeking out forms of authority and challenge their legitimacy”.  It is true that most of us would follow whatever the news says. We are governed by what the media has to present to us. And media not only in the form of political indoctrination but also, in the form of normal day-to-day activities. For example, consider a teenager watching the news about some sort of revolt that a particular class of society started against the upper class. If that teenager were from the upper class, without reasoning, would go against the lower class and look down upon them. This might start reflecting in their behaviour with their schoolmates. They might start using inappropriate language with the classmates or anyone that reminds them of the news they hear or see. Their language becomes controlled by the news.

When we see our daily soaps or award shows, we are often showed commercials that use the persuasive language and draw the attention of the audience. Their use of language – the power that language holds in drawing our attention is clearly seen in advertising campaigns which compel us to buy a particular product.

In Nazi Germany, the language was controlled because people were showed anti-sematic movies leading them to further dislike the Jewish populations. Such forms of indoctrination have always proven to be successful in controlling the language of the people. It is, indeed, like the violence of dictatorship. It, therefore, becomes important for the people to challenge this indoctrination. We have the right to information, then why should our knowledge be left incomplete or biased? I believe that media should be questioned from time. It is risky for us to follow and develop a language that is of the media’s – which is not necessarily true. We should gain the necessary information. However, if not possible, then atleast we should question the media and not just blindly use its language.  

Language - Class and Region

There are many instances when you would hear someone from an upper class of the society commenting about the negativities of the lower class. Most people have the habit of “looking down” on people who cannot match up to their class. This comes out clearly in their language.

Their language (the upper class) is different as compared to the language used by the commoner or middle class. [Stereotype]: A wealthy, upper class person may speak very ‘posh’. They would communicate by a language that is rich in vocabulary, which can force others to do as they are told and the language shows the power they have in the society. Comparing that to a person living in the lower class, the peasantry, would speak a rather different dialect of the same language. The vocabulary would be limited to basic words or ideas, the language used would be the one that be easily subdued by a powerful voice and the language would reflect their submissive nature in the society. A particular example – in India, from where I come from, I get to hear extremes of language. On a 5-star hotel dinner get together, the people are speaking ‘posh’ language with rich words, slight variations in the pronunciations to make it sound more royal and on the other hand, at various homes the language of the lower classes which is comprised of basic words, variations in the pronunciations showing that they lack education or are not used to using better vocabulary as they are said to be ‘submissive’. In one of the articles that I read, one of the ‘dalits’ (lower class) says that our own language – devnagri or Hindi – divides the caste systems. The words that are used to describe us are attached to us, forever.

When it comes to region, the language again starts changing. Every country in this world has their official language. The means of communication is different for each and every country. There are tribes – ethnic minorities in the country itself, other religions that again add other languages to the country. I talk about my homeland, because it is easier for me to relate and I know about the place. Hence, in Gujarat, a native can easily recognise whether the stranger they are talking to comes from which direction (North/South/East/West). There is an immediate difference in dialect. Similarly, here in Antwerp we can realise that a stranger could be from the Netherlands or the Wallonia side. While speaking English, the second most spoken language of the world, there are different variations – the U.S. accent, the Australian accent and the British accent. This shows that no region will share the same way of communications. 

Different emotions recording

People say that I get too emotional at times. They say I am very sensitive. Even the smallest of things can affect Kaneesha.

My emotions often vary from time to time, like any other person. Sometimes I experience the happiest of moments and sometime I feel heavy-hearted. I never feel extremely happy and then extremely sad. That is the reason why I fail to agree completely with Plutchik’s theory that every emotion has an opposite emotion. I believe that there is a scale between all emotions. No one, according to me, can be happy at one moment and then suddenly sad. There are different levels of happiness and sadness.

A few days ago I had my performance. It was the Antwerp Indians Talent Show. I was going to be hosting the show. I realised that it was a highly tensing moment for me, when the authorities asked me to take the floor. I knew that I had rehearsed my speech and was prepared, but somehow felt very numb when I got to the stage’s wings. While coming in front of the audience, I suddenly had my adrenaline pumping. I was nervous. Extremely nervous, probably. I feel that because of this nervousness, I felt my legs were shivering slightly when I was on the stage. This made me think later that if my emotional experience led to a physical change, it means that I agree with Canon-Bard theory of emotions, which states that the physical response occurs due to an emotional move. However, I was put to test. My friends and I were casually mimicking each other. One of them got really upset and slapped me and I was extremely hurt by that action. Normally, we would not do that but that action really had me hurt – anger and sadness. Hence, at that point I felt that I was obviously supporting the James-Lange theory which states that because of a physical reaction you experience an emotional change.  I failed to draw a conclusion to which theory to support. I have experience both the theories and so it cannot be said that one is right and the other is wrong. If there is no surity in emotions, how can there be a surity in the theories of emotion.

I often feel unsure about how I am feeling. Sometimes I am experiencing two or three emotions together. For example, while talking to one of my new friends I feel happy and at the same time have this fear of losing. There is also a sort of insecurity of where our friendship may lead up to, every time I talk with him. It is very difficult at such times to think in one straight direction. I am always fighting between all these emotions. To add the icing on the top, my friends say that the guy likes me and even I like him, but I am unable to realise that fact. This connects back to my previous journal, where I said that people try and make you think of things you have not thought about. I am afraid that I might lose my power of thinking rationally that such an infatuation is not possible and start thinking more emotionally like Damasio suggests.

Other times where I face the same (many emotions) problems is during a family argument. At first, I try and maintain my composure but sometimes I cannot handle the anger and burst out either crying or shouting. Inside me I am cursing myself and am disgusted towards myself for speaking up but at the same time I feel awed that I can actually argue pretty well which I normally fail to do. There is a part of me that says that it is fine and normal to argue for your point to seem correct which I see rationally, but the other emotional side says that you are fighting with your family which is not respectful and disgusting. Sometimes because of this confusion I start crying and get mentally disturbed. I blame it on my teenagehood to cover up; maybe it is that and maybe it is me not knowing what to do in certain situations making me more vulnerable. After all these events, whether it is a fight with friends or family I start having terrible headaches – the physical effect on my emotional state. The headaches are always nightmares because of the pressure build up. I also tend to lose my concentration power and start listening to sad and depressing songs.

I always feel that my emotions decide the kind of music I hear. Or it maybe the other way around at other times. For example, I might listen to a specific song and feel the way the song is. If the song is catchy, can be danced to, I get into that mood of happiness and ecstasy. However, if it is some sad song then I feel that pain and my mood changes to a more calmer and quieter one. Similarly, if I have had a hard day at school and hence a headache, I might take its pressure out in the form of arguments.

Ways of Knowing - Emotion

Robert Ebert said, 'your intellect may be confused, but your emotions will never lie to you.' But can emotions mislead us? And can other people help us to recognize emotions that we didn't realize we had?

Emotions come freely to us. They are our feelings and the reason of expression. If we are happy about something, it is our emotions, and we reflect this in different ways. Similarly, if we are hurt, then sadness becomes our emotion, and we reflect plain stress or it comes out in the form of tears.

Many times we need to make decisions that need two views  - a reason and an emotion. At some instances, we are in a fix because we are unsure about whether reason or emotion is the right way out of the problem.

I have often been told that I should think more rationally. According to people, I am someone who bases most of my decisions on emotions rather than reason. It takes me an effort to find reasons and nothing to find emotions that are reflected or affected by a certain decision.

As I am planning to pursue Business and Management later in my life, it is very important for me to start learning the art of making ‘reason’ decisions.

They often say, that in terms of business, the mind must always rule over the heart. I believe that this is little difficult because if the mind rules it may make decisions that will hurt the hearts of others who are being affected by this ‘reason’ decision. If we are supposed to take a decision regarding what kind of an investment to choose for your business, you cannot base it on emotions like ‘it is good for the people of the investing company; it is my cousins – he needs help’. It needs to be thought of with reason – why this company, what benefits will we gain, etc.

However, sometimes we start thinking more emotionally, like I do. Certain problems like those in schools (peer pressure) would lead people into taking more emotional decision.

A clear example of an emotion misleading us would be those cases of jealousy, hatred and fear. In school, for example, due to bullying or ‘teenage love’ problems, students take huge leaps. The peer pressure cannot be handled. Instead of finding a reason and a way to challenge, people may take threatening decision – suicide, for example. At these moments, we realise that emotions can lead us into doing something highly threatening.

Similarly, in the business case, if we think emotionally and invest into a friend or relative’s firm, knowing that there is not much scope, we are hurting ourself economically. This could later lead to many miscalculations and financial difficulties.

The emotion of jealousy can tear the best of friendships, apart. Instead of reasoning or thinking whether your friend is doing something deliberately, if in case of getting much better marks (naturally or hard work), we often tend to get jealous. This jealousy leads to us to spoiling the lives of these friends.

If these emotions are not controlled, they can lead to many disastrous situations where a person looses the sense to think with a reason as suggested by  Damasio. When emotions take over, they can lead us to take better decisions or they can mislead us into taking decisions that can have a worse long term effect.

The long-term effect is not only caused by the emotion but also by other people, the outside world. For example, if we are angry with a best friend of ours and another person who is possibly jealous of our friendship, will try and enforce the wrong feelings of vengeance into us, which can lead us to do something that would cause further hatred between our friend and us. The other friend, being nice, could also try and solve the matter by making us think about the beautiful moments spent with the best friend – emotional. That would lead us to realise our mistake, feel ashamed.

So yes, other people can lead us to experience feelings that we have never realised. Many times it is our parents or family members that make us feel better in times of depression. They change our moods and leave feeling a different emotion altogether.