Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Mon Oct 10, 2022 5:05 am
JohnW wrote: ↑Sun Oct 09, 2022 3:18 am
During this process, I cut a natural gas line. Natural gas lines simply weren't in my calculations. I didn't realize PVC was sometimes used for natural gas lines. As an aside, shortly after this event I hired the job out.
I know this isn't a great example, but right before I cut that gas line, I was sure it was a water line. I was so sure that it took me quite a few seconds for the truth to work past my logical construct.
That isn't an example of something illogical that is true. That's merely an example of you making a mistake.
You asserted that there are some things that are illogical but nevertheless true. Will you please give me an example of something Illogical that is nevertheless true?
Now you are going to make me work harder. I was hoping I could get away with just the perception of illogical but true. From the individual's perspective, it feels like the same thing. Again, I'm not meaning illogical in the strictest sense.
Let's try something like quantum mechanics. Wave-particle duality. Even though you could argue it isn't strictly illogical, if we are going with a loose sense of the word, it certainly seems illogical. How can particles act like waves or vice versa depending on how we as the observer measure them. Does the logical conclusion assign sentience to the particle? That would be silly. There just isn't a good answer. The whole things seems illogical, even if we can't put our finger on exactly why. It is absolutely true, though. Particles absolutely act like waves and waves act like particles depending on how you look at them.
Let me try one a little more rigorous, even though I'm not that good at logical rigor. Premise 1) a negative number times a negative number is a positive number. Similarly, A * B = C where C is a positive number if both A and B are positive and C is a negative number if either A or B are negative. Premise 2) The square root function (sqrt()) gives the square root of a number D where F^2 = D, and the sign of D is unknown (i.e. sqrt(D) = +- F). Assuming these premises, then the number sqrt(-1) is impossible. There is no logical way we can get an answer from these rules. It doesn't exist. You might even call it an imaginary number. All sorts of logical arguments could be made (and were made) as to why this travesty of a number cannot exist. Of course, we all know imaginary numbers are absolutely true.
I know I may be cheating a little here, but the point is that when you have missing premises or incomplete information, you will argue with complete confidence that something is illogical, even though in reality it is true. People did this all through the Middle Ages about imaginary numbers (which was originally intended as a derogatory term). People do this today, without realizing it. Yes, I know if we had absolutely all information, you might have a good argument that there is nothing that is illogical and still true, but functionally that is never the case. So functionally, things appear completely illogical all the time but are still completely true.