This is a very weird thought experiment....
What is the difference between this two logic?
Logic 1
1. Statement 1: I am always right
2. Statement 2: If I am not right, refer statement 1.
Logic 2
1. Statement 1: Fact is true
2. Statement 2: What I say is fact
3. Statement 3: If what I say doesn't agree with world's fact, the world is wrong.
This is a daily quarrel sparked on somewhere in a day....At first, the two logic sound almost the same damn thing. You can picture someone that say those thing is a bigot that think that he is always right? Or is it really the same?
But thinking for the sake of thinking, let's inspect this two statement
Statement 1 is basically rephrased as "I am right and never wrong". No people will like to associate themselves to this kind of statement. It was a totalitarian statement, a statement of a brute. No one will think of them as "right and never wrong", because by saying this statement 1 out, you had just tell the world is a bigot.
How about logic 2?
Statement 2 , at a first glance is no different. But there exist a few words. For one, there is this existence of "fact is true", which somehow implies that there is a universal fact/truth lingering around there. The first statement indirectly implies that there's an entity of truth that is absolute.
In fact, if you look hard enough, the "fact is truth" statement manifest itself in a lot of form in today's life.
- John 1.46 - , "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.
- The movement of 911 as government is doing the inside job is known as 9/11 Truth movement
- There's a lot of "the evil truth of Mohammed" lingering around youtube.
- And similarly speaking, you have "the evil truth of Jew" and "Evil truth of Christianity" lingering around Google
- To relate to the latest event of Bersih movement, each party is trying to make their stand-point that the cause they are fighting is the truth
Poke on statement 2:
- What I say is fact
- The word "say" could be misnomer. It could be "what I think,do, or say is factual, hence is true. Once you realized the logic of statement 1, you can realize that statement 2 is basically an alignment, that the person said/do/think is aligned to truth.
And this is what separates logic number1 and 2. Logic number 1 assume that he is the ultimate truth, and hence always right . Logic number 2 however assert of an universal truth, and he is aligned to the truth. What I say is fact, which is true - indirectly acknowledges that there is something superior to "I" , and that is the "truth". Replace the truth with a theory, a religion, and suddenly things get more interesting to poke at.
Unconvinced?
The statement "The 911 incident is an insider job in fact done by the government" sound more convincing that "the 911 incident is an insider job by government". Maybe there's only a difference of word length, but imagine this is a statement told by 2 guy. I can tell the 2nd guy is more confident than the first guy, but the first guy probably has more evidence that the 2nd guy.
The third statement of " If what I say doesn't agree with world's fact, the world is wrong." is a replication of Cao Cao saying. But set that aside, I think "the world" is also a misnomer. The world will be probably better if you replaced it with "People that disagree with me". Well, it's either people agree with you or people disagree with you on a certain issue (the fence-stander is nt discussed). And it is most probably the "person that disagrees" that is on the wrong side.
Note at this point of discussion, I might poke on religion or some belief territory without noticing. Well, I can assure I am a fence-stander in those issue. I poke the mind, and that's all I do if you are engaging a mind experiment. Think it this way - Someone that say "Allah is the truth" and "Jesus is the truth" is actually no different than " The truth is there is no god and god is a delusion". All three parties, are aligned to a statement of absolute truth.
But in the end of the day, I don't really think there's anything wrong with people of mindset logic 1 and mindset logic 2. What I feared it there exist an untold statement in result on logic 1 and logic 2...
"The one that is wrong/alligned in the wrong course must be righted. "
No comments:
Post a Comment