Wow, you bring up a loaded topic. I may have a foot in both camps, but not completely in either. I have a chemistry degree but now work in medical IT and so I am trained to use that type of logic and problem solving. But I often find myself irate with mainstream "skeptics" because I think they misuse logic towards their own ends. But then again I also get frustrated with people at the other end of the spectrum who dismiss logic entirely.

There is a reasonable principle which states that that which is not true is false. However, I feel that skeptics misrepresent this principle as that which is not _proven_ true is necessarily false, and I find that disagreeable.

In comp sci there is a third state of logic which is "unknown." But I tend to believe that there are at least five states of logic:

Provably True
Unproven yet supported by evidence
Unknown and unprovable
Unproven yet negatively unsupported by evidence
Provably False

Your "mainstream" folks may not accept that the middle three states of logic that I propose even exist. Alternatively, I think that "alternative" thinkers spend most of their time there. Edit:Not implying that is a bad thing.

--Andy



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12-Jul-19 11:47 by AndyBlackard.