Does Anyone Ever Imagine the Word Logic and Schizophrenia in the Same Sentence?

I think part of the problem for psychology as a phenomenal form of logic that is under analysis via scientific methodology is that a consistent kind of logic or logicality from one scz to the next as far as what they are experiencing appears to be very random at least at first. But then the rationality of these perceptions are so inherently false or fallacious when considering the individuals’ external reality as the par standard that these experiences are measured by, that the idea of a “logicality” of those informational experiences are simply discarded as meaningless junk like a 10,000 page epic saga tale typed out vivaciously by a team of chimps across a few years in the works.

I’m interested in two things:

What is the logicality of these scz experiences as in what is the meaning of what, and how does that determine what is inherit about that extrapolated out and considering the synergistic big picture for their logic.

Also I would expect that a routine exercise be done by the scz folks to write out or “dictate to a voice to text computer app” before editing the logicality of their way of thinking. For instance what causes what, and what was it that was caused would be the basis of the project coinciding with some other lessons about grammar, logic, and rhetoric when impressed upon the sense faculties, and about math, geometry, music (mathematical time measures) and cosmology.

I would want to see if they can see their fallacies, and if they can’t, understand what reasoning they use to continue to disregard what ordinarily would be every reason to discard the fallacious belief.

And I would even like to fund this project/education, and archive the practices used and result per the individuals’ subjective anecdotes.

I truly believe that if an scz’s focus can be taken away from the subjects whatever the senses were previously focused and even scared of to becoming on informational logic of the sense faculties themselves.

That is to say that instead of looking out at a false reality, look at what is looking and seeing that fallacious reality.

The problem with this that I foresee is that this can be something of a belief system as in you get into the weeds of “religious and political sci fi.” I mean we’re talking some primitive hocus pocus cult mentalities here when we are talking scz individuals especially when they are full blown not knowing what reality is yet as if they woke up out of a closet, and chose door #2; the “spacecadetist rules of reality.”

No offense to anyone.

I’m an scz and it appears I’ve been much worse off than most here, and I’m not offended. I’m only interested not just saying I’m interested in our phenomena as if to pretend. I’m really interested in what our reality is really. :slight_smile: :+1:

But you can see how much of a wall there may be for some when it comes to looking back onto the self’s sense experience faculties and information fueling them when they see those very things through a completely other lens. And I understand that very much. It only makes me more interested because I passionately study civilization science, and that that is an area that I understand very, very well.

"Logic"
log·ic (lŏj′ĭk)
n.

  1. The study of principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content, and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.

a. A system of reasoning: Aristotle’s logic.
b. A mode of reasoning: By that logic, we should sell the company tomorrow.
c. The formal, guiding principles of a discipline, school, or science.
3. Valid reasoning: Your paper lacks the logic to prove your thesis.
4. The relationship between elements and between an element and the whole in a set of objects, individuals, principles, or events: There’s a certain logic to the motion of rush-hour traffic.
5. Computers
a. The nonarithmetic operations performed by a computer, such as sorting, comparing, and matching, that involve yes-no decisions.
b. Computer circuitry.
c. Graphic representation of computer circuitry.
[Middle English, from Old French logique, from Latin logica, from Greek logikē (tekhnē), (art) of reasoning, logic, feminine of logikos, of reasoning, from logos, reason; see leg- in the Appendix of Indo-European roots.]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
logic (ˈlɒdʒɪk)
n

  1. (Logic) the branch of philosophy concerned with analysing the patterns of reasoning by which a conclusion is properly drawn from a set of premises, without reference to meaning or context. See also formal logic, deduction4, induction4
  2. (Logic) any particular formal system in which are defined axioms and rules of inference. Compare formal system, formal language
  3. the system and principles of reasoning used in a specific field of study
  4. a particular method of argument or reasoning
  5. force or effectiveness in argument or dispute
  6. reasoned thought or argument, as distinguished from irrationality
  7. the relationship and interdependence of a series of events, facts, etc
  8. (Logic) chop logic to use excessively subtle or involved logic or argument
  9. (Computer Science) electronics computing
    a. the principles underlying the units in a computer system that perform arithmetical and logical operations. See also logic circuit
    b. (as modifier): a logic element.
    [C14: from Old French logique from Medieval Latin logica (neuter plural, treated in Medieval Latin as feminine singular), from Greek logikos concerning speech or reasoning]
    Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014
    log•ic (ˈlɒdʒ ɪk)

n.

  1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
  2. symbolic logic.
  3. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation.
  4. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
  5. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions.
  6. the consistency to be discerned in a work of art, system, etc.
  7. any connection between facts that seems reasonable or inevitable.

a. the arrangement of circuitry in a computer.
b. a circuit or circuits designed to perform functions defined in terms of mathematical logic.
[1325–75; Middle English logik < Latin logica, n. use of neuter pl. of Greek logikós of speech or reason. See logos, -ic]
log′ic•less, adj.
Random House Kernerman Webster’s College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
log·ic (lŏj′ĭk)
The study of the principles of reasoning.
The American Heritage® Student Science Dictionary, Second Edition. Copyright © 2014 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Logic
See also argumentation; mathematics; philosophy; thinking; truth and error.

a posteriori
the process of reasoning from effect to cause, based upon observation.
apriorism

  1. the method of a priori reasoning, i.e., deductive reasoning, from cause to effect or from the general to the particular.
  2. an a priori principle.
    Barbara
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the first figure, in which there are two universal affirmative premises and a universal affirmative conclusion.
    Barmalip, Bramantip
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the fourth figure, in which there are two universal affirmative premises and a particular affirmative conclusion.
    Baroco
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the second figure, in which there is one universal affirmative and one particular negative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Bocardo
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there is one particular negative and one universal affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Camestres
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the second figure, in which there is one universal affirmative and one universal negative premise and a universal negative conclusion.
    Celarent
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the first figure, in which there is one universal negative and one universal affirmative premise and a universal negative conclusion.
    Cesare
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the second figure, in which there is one universal negative and one universal affirmative premise and a universal negative conclusion.
    Darapti
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there are two universal affirmative premises and a particular affirmative conclusion.
    Darii
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the first figure, in which there is one universal affirmative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular affirmative conclusion.
    Datisi
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there is one universal affirmative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular affirmative conclusion.
    definiendum
  3. an expression that has to be defined in terms of a previously defined expression.
  4. anything that has to be defined. — definienda, n., pl.
    Dimaris
    Dimatis.
    Dimatis
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the fourth figure, in which there is one universal affirmative and one affirmative premise and a particular affirmative conclusion. Also called Dimaris.
    Disamis
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there is one particular affirmative and one universal affirmative premise and a particular affirmative conclusion.
    elenchus
    a syllogistic argument that refutes a proposition by proving the direct opposite of its conclusion. — elenchic, elenctic, adj.
    epicheirema
    a syllogism in which the truth of one of the premises is confirmed by an annexed proposition (prosyllogism), thus resulting in the formation of a compound argument. See also prosyllogism.
    equipollence, equipollency
    equality between two or more propositions, as when two propositions have the same meaning but are expressed differently. See also agreement.
    Felapton
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there is one universal negative and one universal affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Ferio
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the first figure, in which there is one universal negative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Feriso
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the third figure, in which there is one universal negative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion. Also Ferison.
    Ferison
    Feriso.
    Fesapo
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the fourth figure, in which there is one universal negative and one universal affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Festino
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the second figure, in which there is one universal negative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    Fresison
    a mnemonic word to represent a syllogistic argument in the fourth figure, in which there is one universal negative and one particular affirmative premise and a particular negative conclusion.
    metalogic
    the metaphysics or metaphysical aspects of logic. — metalogical, adj.
    methodology
    a division of logic devoted to the application of reasoning to science and philosophy. See also classification; order and disorder. — methodological, adj.
    polylemma
    a multiple dilemma or one with many equally unacceptable alternatives; a difficult predicament.
    prosyllogism
    a syllogism connected with another in such a way that the conclusion of the first is the premise of the one following.
    schematism
    the form or character of a syllogism.
    sorites
    an elliptical series of syllogism, in which the premises are so arranged that the predicate of the first is the subject of the next, continuing thus until the subject of the first is united with the predicate of the last. — soritical, soritic, adj.
    syllogism
    a form of reasoning in which two propositions or premises are stated and a logical conclusion is drawn from them. Each premise has the subject-predicate form, and each shares a common element called the middle term.
    syntheticism
    the principles or practice of synthesis or synthetic methods or techniques, i.e., the process of deductive reasoning, as from cause to effect, from the simple elements to the complex whole, etc.
    -Ologies & -Isms. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
    ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
    Switch to new thesaurus
    Noun 1. logic - the branch of philosophy that analyzes inferencelogic - the branch of philosophy that analyzes inference
    consistency - (logic) an attribute of a logical system that is so constituted that none of the propositions deducible from the axioms contradict one another
    completeness - (logic) an attribute of a logical system that is so constituted that a contradiction arises if any proposition is introduced that cannot be derived from the axioms of the system
    corollary - (logic) an inference that follows directly from the proof of another proposition
    non sequitur - (logic) a conclusion that does not follow from the premises
    arity - the number of arguments that a function can take
    philosophy - the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics
    modal logic - the logical study of necessity and possibility
    logical quantifier, quantifier - (logic) a word (such as some' orall’ or no') that binds the variables in a logical proposition subject - (logic) the first term of a proposition predicate - (logic) what is predicated of the subject of a proposition; the second term in a proposition is predicated of the first term by means of the copula; "Socrates is a man’ predicates manhood of Socrates"
    proof - a formal series of statements showing that if one thing is true something else necessarily follows from it
    paradox - (logic) a statement that contradicts itself; "I always lie' is a paradox because if it is true it must be false" postulation, predication - (logic) a declaration of something self-evident; something that can be assumed as the basis for argument explanandum, explicandum - (logic) a statement of something (a fact or thing or expression) to be explained explanans - (logic) statements that explain the explicandum; the explanatory premises proposition - (logic) a statement that affirms or denies something and is either true or false particular proposition, particular - (logic) a proposition that asserts something about some (but not all) members of a class universal proposition, universal - (logic) a proposition that asserts something of all members of a class negation - (logic) a proposition that is true if and only if another proposition is false posit, postulate - (logic) a proposition that is accepted as true in order to provide a basis for logical reasoning axiom - (logic) a proposition that is not susceptible of proof or disproof; its truth is assumed to be self-evident tautology - (logic) a statement that is necessarily true; "the statementhe is brave or he is not brave’ is a tautology"
    contradiction in terms, contradiction - (logic) a statement that is necessarily false; "the statement he is brave and he is not brave' is a contradiction" logic operation, logical operation - an operation that follows the rules of symbolic logic logical relation - a relation between propositions transitivity - (logic and mathematics) a relation between three elements such that if it holds between the first and second and it also holds between the second and third it must necessarily hold between the first and third reflexiveness, reflexivity - (logic and mathematics) a relation such that it holds between an element and itself quantify - use as a quantifier presuppose, suppose - require as a necessary antecedent or precondition; "This step presupposes two prior ones" analytical, analytic - of a proposition that is necessarily true independent of fact or experience; "all spinsters are unmarried’ is an analytic proposition"
    synthetical, synthetic - of a proposition whose truth value is determined by observation or facts; "all men are arrogant' is a synthetic proposition" inductive - of reasoning; proceeding from particular facts to a general conclusion; "inductive reasoning" nonmonotonic - not monotonic categorematic - of a term or phrase capable of standing as the subject or (especially) the predicate of a proposition syncategorematic - of a term that cannot stand as the subject or (especially) the predicate of a proposition but must be used in conjunction with other terms; "or’ is a syncategorematic term"
    scopal - of or relating to scope; “scopal dependency”
  5. logic - reasoned and reasonable judgment; "it made a certain kind of logic"
    common sense, good sense, gumption, horse sense, mother wit, sense - sound practical judgment; “Common sense is not so common”; “he hasn’t got the sense God gave little green apples”; “fortunately she had the good sense to run away”
  6. logic - the principles that guide reasoning within a given field or situation; “economic logic requires it”; "by the logic of war"
    principle - a basic truth or law or assumption; “the principles of democracy”
  7. logic - the system of operations performed by a computer that underlies the machine’s representation of logical operations
    system of rules, system - a complex of methods or rules governing behavior; “they have to operate under a system they oppose”; "that language has a complex system for indicating gender"
    computer science, computing - the branch of engineering science that studies (with the aid of computers) computable processes and structures
  8. logic - a system of reasoning
    logical system, system of logic
    system of rules, system - a complex of methods or rules governing behavior; “they have to operate under a system they oppose”; "that language has a complex system for indicating gender"
    Aristotelian logic - the syllogistic logic of Aristotle as developed by Boethius in the Middle Ages
    formal logic, mathematical logic, symbolic logic - any logical system that abstracts the form of statements away from their content in order to establish abstract criteria of consistency and validity
    extrapolate - gain knowledge of (an area not known or experienced) by extrapolating
    induce - reason or establish by induction
    deduce, derive, infer, deduct - reason by deduction; establish by deduction
    negate, contradict - prove negative; show to be false
    elicit - derive by reason; “elicit a solution”

I guess my point is that I want to understand the informational world inside of people in general. I have researched many years the “informational world” that is in the common population’s minds, but I have not done so in the scz’s mind’s other than my own.

My original intentions for doing this research dating back several years ago was to not only supposedly “rediscover” what conventional thinking minds are like, but to figure them out in the first place. I didn’t grow up learning what conventional thinking minds were like in my life. I wound up with scz, and that throw me far off of the tracks. I always believed that if I assert myself towards learning what everyone else thinks like and how reality works regardless of how they see it or not, then I could reform the way I perceive.

Before that I was exploring the USA and the various races and cultures within those races, and I came from a school that was a kind of global hub of races and cultures. So this pursuit of how the world thinks just fell into line with what as already going on with me for 10 years. So overall it’s been about 20 years in the making.

But now I want to research the scz’s way of thinking; that informational world inside which I believe is ignored as nothing more than a bio-chemical waste product. I think there is rhyme and reason to be found there, but it takes work to find it.

So it seems interesting. :thinking:

Yes, actually, if for no other reason than that you post a lot about this particular subject.

Incidentally, that’s an impressive wall of text, even by your posting standards. :grin:

Have you considered maybe starting a blog where you can post your essays? Just a thought.

4 Likes

No, not yet. I’m warming up. I think I’ll do something more formal like you are saying for discussion including documentaries on youtube, but I think that I need to research much more in order to be “weighed down in the ballast, so I’m not blown off keel” when the objections pour in, and I can “navigate a clear course of discussion” for my/our research; whoever else maybe involved and/or interested.

I’ll admit I’m kind of dragging here to find anyone that might be interested or have something to add. I’d normally write these things simply in my journals like usual, but I’d like to see feedback to be as productive as possible in the limited amount of time in each year.

OMG!! That’s the longest Wall of text I’ve ever encountered on here!! :scream:

9 Likes

Thanks. I wrote little bit of it myself. :smirk:

3 Likes

Type in hyperlogical and schizophrenia.

I’m on my phone and your original post took up 80% of the page. Just as wrll I didn’t even read 10% of your post because I think you are giving unnecessary details that make it hard to read what you’re saying.

This was just an honest critique that I’m giving to try to help you out because I think a lot of people would like to hear your thoughts.

These phenomena manifest in tendencies towards being hyper-logical and hyper-reflective and in lacking the mastery of more contextually adapted, fluid aspects of life, governed more by ‘the logic of the world rather than the logic of the logicians’

1 Like

Yes, I’ll attest to that, and you know what, I’m no more morally incorrect than I am to write how I write.

If a man is inherently logical, that’s what he is. I believe that they call those nerds, and compared to someone who cannot be employed that is a “high class problem” to be having which is what they call a problem that pays money in the business world. And if that person were dedicated, and served the community with that kind of “mind,” then he should be patted on the back. Nash comes to mind and game theory, but there are probably many scz’s that learned the logic of their minds, and simply were more successful than the barrier of uselessness without declaring they had a problem which would entail being diagnosed.

I know that also there are people’s of the past when have borne you all as far as your intact genes which you are based who would have said that your science journals and claims are nonsensical making you a “questionable character.”

The thread isn’t about me. Let’s remember that. So be kind, and keep it on subject. Thank you for your replies and/or concern. :+1:

My “juniorology skills” tell me that you all assume I typed all of that. Please tell me that’s not true. :rofl:

This reminds me when I was a lot more schizophrenic and confused about 10 years ago deciding what I was really going to do with my life while I was in college, amateur leagues, working on going to the minor league (I hoped), and beginning a contracting business.

I thought to myself again and again if I am just being delusional of the grandiose kind or not as far as my ambitions or even what I should consider to do with my life. In either case I knew what I was going to do then was going to affect the rest of my life and how I do any good for the rest of the community vs. being useless.

My point is that I considered the grand delusions of scz and the useless type of person with these kinds of factors which wind them in spinning circles going nowhere except for conundrums and trouble. I was experienced with conundrums and spinning circles going nowhere in my life, so I knew I should not do that again.

My conclusion was this:

It’s logical that if a person has grand delusions, and that he follows them to the fullest in all that he can be and do for any given amount of years, and if these are certain to make he and what his works are a productive benefit to himself and the rest of the community such that he can add to knowledge or help pull the work load without a doubt, then his grand delusions are objectively sound.

Lately in my research I have found that truths to be apparent and important to the way people act and what they do or don’t accomplish whether it is good or bad.

For example of you are told a tall tale, and you wind up becoming a great help to yourself and the rest of the world even if you are many, many other people that have believed it, then is that tale what matters, or is it what was accomplished to benefit the world and themselves that matters, or is it…

…the methodology to cause the actions that took place after the tall tale was told? 1, 2, or 3?

I believe three because that is the phenomenon most related to the most amount of safety and fulfillment.

If I just sat on my thumb, and I said nothing, I would neither gain anything nor would I contribute anything to anyone today or later in life. However I’m developing, and I do so by thinking out loud as I write. I am sharing which is a social action. It’s part of researching to figure out things that lead to the development of other things…

…which is a stark contrast to being a person that cannot be employed.

I employ myself, and I have begun a second small business for sport most of all, but also to explore a new field of science and technology.

If you are worried about logical thinking and writing while you cannot add to the subject I’m writing about, then that hurts my feelings. Why would you want to hurt my feelings?

You do realize that my post was a few paragraphs, and the copy/paste definition of logic was the bulk majority of the rest, right? Can you say that you know that now?

1 Like

Apparently nerds can also be snarky and aloof. :thinking:

1 Like
  • Is the definition Logic identical to the definition in the original post?
  • Is the definition of Logic NOT identical to the definition in the original post?

0 voters

  • Part of the original top post was written by DMA and part was copy and paste?
  • The whole post was written by DMA with no copy and past?

0 voters

No offense. I don’t know if these are relevant to you psychologically, but I’ll appreciate it if you do answer the polls. Thank you very much. I’ll always appreciate your input.

People online often think that’s what I’m being.

I’m still developing the ability to state myself while make without a doubt of certainty that I was not mistaken for being “what you said.”

So as a result I wind up appologizing a lot more than I would in real life, but it turns out that this is good practice for real life because since I came back to this site this year, I have been receiving better reactions to my assertions in public. Go figure. Hehe :grinning:

Be careful, Trump may notice your skill in building walls. :smiley:

4 Likes

Do you think I wrote all of that?

Thanks, firemonkey, for your resourcefulness. I appreciate what firemonkey does for my threads. :+1:

Please do keep trying. :rofl: I am listening 24/7, 8 days a week.

:airplane::camping:

I didnt read the whole thing cause english is not my motherlanguage but i think szphrenics think very big. Their logic is correct. But maybe szprenics try to.start from the top …hard things…but its better to start with little things …from the bottom. Szprenics try to change the world cause they are worried. But maybe it would be better to lower the goal.

You can explain a very sophisticated thing in one simple sentence if you understand the listeners way of understanding and thinking…and if they are capable of recieving the info.

Also i think that inorder to understand something your heart has to WANT to underestand it.

1 Like