Wednesday, July 23, 2014
|William Thomson 1860’s|
|pure logic 1|
|pure logic 2|
|Types of Beliefs 1|
|Types of Beliefs 2|
|Types of Beliefs 3|
Logic, definitions of Pure Logic and types of beliefs…!
I suppose you do not have an easy email known contact
to share thoughts, ideas, in writing!
I’ve defined what the theory of Cognitive Science lacks
to explain how information is kept in our neurons/brains/
minds! But that is for my BOOK2 which is not for so soon!
I did not want to indulge in any Bible dissent and/or
Namely I wanted to only share the two themes I have shared
on users at WIKIPEDIA!
That is at:
(1) What is first? Science or Logic?
(2) I differ in your WORD meanings
I will use a reference to the “particular” definition
or usage given by the late ARCHBISHOP of CANTERBURY,
William Thomson, of pure logic, in his Book of Logic.
I happen to have a reprint of his Book! Probably not
buried from World Libraries and re-prints on amazon.com,
but buried most likely from Universities Academia!
The Books title is:
An outline of the necessary LAWS OF THOUGHT: A treatise
on Pure and Applied Logic. By William Thomson, D.D.
5. Pure Logic (which is later in the order of discovery
than applied, inasmuch as it is formed by abstracting
from that more general science) takes no account of
modes in which we collect the materials of thought, such
as Perception, Belief, Memory, Suggestion, Association
of Ideas; although these are all in one sense laws of
thought.* Presupposing the possession of the materials,
it only refers them to their proper head or principle,
as conceptions, as subjects or predicates, as judgements,
or as arguments. It enounces the laws we must observe in
thinking, but does not explain the subsidiary processes,
some or all of which must take place to allow us to think.
Again, in pure logic, the different processes of the mind
are regarded in their perfect and complete state; whilst
in applied, the imperfect faculties of man, the limited
opportunities of observation, the necessity of deciding
upon a question when the materials of a judgement are still
insufficient, impose many limitations on the perfection
of our knowledge.
11. Pure Logic is a science of the form, or of the formal
laws of thinking, and not of the matter. The terms form
and matter, in their philosophic use, will require some
A statue may be considered as consisting of two parts, the
marble out of which it is hewn, which is its matter or
stuff, and the form which the artist communicates. The
latter is esential to the statue, but not the former,
since the work might be the same, though the material
different; but if the form were wanting we could not even
call the work a statue. This notion of a material
susceptible of a certain form, the accession of which shall
give it a new nature and name, may be regarded as matter,
and geometrical figures as the form impressed in it. The
voice is the matter of speech, and articulation the form.
But as it is the form which proximately and obviously makes
the thing what it is (although there can be no form without
matter), the word form to be interchanged with essence and
I completely understand your doubts on my usage of the
terminology of PURE LOGIC!
But what has meaning and usage in chemistry, minerals,
language, can be completely defined using a combined
Thus I simplify the issue, by merely saying pure is not
only the specific pure H2O formula for water, but can
also mean the necessary (complete) water contents the
human body needs, as MINERAL WATER, from a mountain
spring, plus a bit of chlorine, the brain needs, etc…!
Or as you find the origin of pure bauxite from where you
can make Aluminum. Or the pure form of gold found in rock
in Nature, which is pure, but can be further purified to
a specific form of Gold. But that came from a complete
general pure form in nature!
Pure logic is the complete realm of the necessary rules
for thought: the realm of positive good logic, and the
realm of negative bad logic! And so on!
Anyway, I am allowed to define or make a self definition
as pertaining the redaction of my Books and studies! In
this lies my originality!
For example in thought we can show a pure perfect idea,
or a merely logic idea!
Light is white, which is logic! But in complete pure logic,
we know light is not only white, it is even out of the
range of human eyesight perception!
I make reference to the types of beliefs
mentioned by the late Arch Bishop William
Thomson. Mainly because it has to do with
anything else we might make reference to!
I attach the scans as I am lazy to transcribe!
He mentions 9 types of beliefs that he can
The lowest belief is what Evolution declares
is “not Possible” as you cannot prove GOD,
as to what they say, they do not exert or know
of a scientific method to do so! Thus they
I would add that what is “not-possible” is in
lower standing than DOUBTFUL!
I CLAIM TO PROVE “entities”, “gods”, in
my Book of Pure Logic! Which would not
be even close to something defined as a
person God of the Bible!
I ALSO CLAIM, that what our minds cannot
know, or do not know, or cannot prove, does
not necessarily mean NON-EXISTENCE,
OR WRONG LOGIC ! Rather it is defined
as ABYSSES OF KNOWLEDGE!
We can sometimes imagine something in the
realm of the ABYSSES OF KNOWLEDGE,
which could be logic! OF COURSE SCIENCE
FICTION, generally goes against known laws of
PHYSICS, gravitational laws, etc…!
I also define that MATHEMATICS is too perfect,
and there could be pure logic truths, correct complete
logic, without it being LEVEL 9 Beliefs of perfect
I differ in INFINITY, though “pi” and “e” have infinite
IN THE WORLD OF MATTER “INFINITY”
IS NOT LOGICAL OR MAKE SENSE IN PURE
So when Christians claim an Infinite God, loving, and
all savvy and all powerful, I have my doubts in this
possibility…! THIS I CLAIM to be in what you claim
that your God knows all our thoughts, or can solve
an impossible TO DECIPHER ENCODING SYSTEM,
unless he(she) could read my mind…!
So getting back to the point, the late AchBsp
W. Thomson, explained that pure logic is the
science of the FORM, or of the formal laws
of thinking, and NOT OF THE MATTER…!
So essentially the FORM of thinking and their
studies and laws, are of course in any realm,
be they positive or negative!
THIS MEANS that pure thinking is in the specific
usage, positive thinking…! But pure logic,
is all thinking, or all the laws to think
SO IF YOU ESTABLISH what are the laws of correct
thinking (formal), FROM THEM STEM necessarily OR
ARE IMPLIED, what is not CORRECT THINKING, or
That is the usage of the terminology of PURE LOGIC
and APPLIED LOGIC…!
TO ESTABLISH non corrupted correct FORMAL ways of
thinking, you use as reference what is wrong
thinking…! THUS COMPLETE THINKING, can be right
SO TO SAY PURE LOGIC, is only non corrupted or
“pure” thinking by itself, would be saying day
is day, without the reference point of what is
night or darkness! IT WOULD BE LACKING THE
OPPOSITE and thus incomplete…!
SO PURE LOGIC, is complete, because it is “pure”
non-corrupted LAWS OF THINKING, compared to
wrong “corrupted” WRONG THINKING!
BELIEFS can be in pure logic, wrong thinking!
SO IF I ONLY HAD USED the title for my Book as:
BOOK OF LOGIC, it would not have been as original
in establishing “PURE” NON CORRUPTED, OR CORRUPTED
H2O as a chemical formula is PURE and NOT CORRUPTED,
but in its natural form in nature, it is CORRUPTED!
Even distilled water has “leaching” to it, unless
done with high stress steel, in a nearly vacuum clean
ANYWAY, pure logic establishes the unique FORM of
thought, and not the MATTER as such!
THE WORD LOGIC OR LOGICAL by itself, might be
complete, but PURE establishes by defect what is
not PURE THINKING…!
SO YOU CANNOT ISOLATE “PURE” THINKING, with out
knowing what “IS NOT PURE” THINKING…!
I might not have explained entirely the usage of
the terminology of PURE LOGIC in my Book #1…!