Garbage Logic Exposed #1Unity Consciousness #2278

.

(9apq of 11)

Many of our thought processes are made up of:
1. A logical statement containing two to three logical segments.
2. Each segment has its own meaning.
3. Each segment contains at least one word upon which the logical segment hinges and/or whose definition and meaning is suboptimal.

What we tend to do is carelessly connect those two or three logical segments into a very raggedy thought process and come up with faulty conclusions. It takes years of practice to mess up our logic and turn it into garbage. It takes years to clean it out and refurbish it. This Garbage Logic Exposed Series will dissect and analyze faulty logic that is commonplace. Statements made by respondents are indicative of many logical statements we use to form erroneous opinions about a person, place or thing.

For example:

Question: Do you think she killed her parents?

Respondent: Well she was a loner and I heard people talking.

My Comments on the first logical segment: The respondent has connected being a loner with a killer tendency. She clearly gets this notion from news reports. What is meant by loner? How is it measured? If loners tend to be the killers then what accounts for all the people in relationships who kill people and their friends, family, neighbors and coworkers say, they seemed normal? Don't we know by now that people who seem normal kill more people than people we consider abnormal?

My Comments on the second logical segment: To say “I heard people talking” is like picking up shit and throwing it as far as you can. Why would you do that? And why would you repeat something and use it as factual unless you get the names of the people you heard talking and write down their statements so each person and their statements can be investigated to find out how each person learned about the information. Almost always you will find the information was started by liars and haters. If this were not so, then the statement “I heard people talking” would also include the evidence upon which the talking is based. In court this is called hearsay and is usually inadmissible; however in everyday life, hearsay is almost always all that's needed to convince garbage collectors they are doing a good job of thinking for themselves.

Both parts of the logical statement are weak and say more about the respondent than it does about the accused.
The respondent should have said I don't know or I don't have a reasonable basis for thinking she did kill her parents. But we can't resist the urge to pretend we know.