Appreciating the structures and interconnections of Logic: Music, Mathematics, Language, Natural Sciences and more
These are a few ideas--not yet ready for prime time-- that have been bouncing around in my mind ... and today finally bounced out
The following ideas are still somewhat unpolished, and perhaps the only clarity I have around them right now is the fact that they are still unclear. But nonetheless I’ve decided to go ahead and run them up the flagpole; maybe someone out there has a better version/explanation/resource and can share in the comments below.
What I’m looking for in this relationship (diagramed below) is something that requires logic to understand but also develops logic in the fight to understand it; further it should be such that the effect on logic/cognition overflows into other areas.
If you are new to and interested in these themes then you might look at my previous posts under the title of "brain candy" which focused on 1) some of my favorite books, 2) War on Sense-making, Schmachtenberger 2019, and 3) Conceptual Expansion w D.Snowden 2016, 2021.
I think that I was affected and perplexed by the comment by the late Roger Scruton PhD (1944-2020) in his video “Why Beauty Matters” [see video provided below from several sources] which I’ve watched at least twice on my own and once without benefit in the company of my father, somewhat ironically nearly the same time that Scruton died in January 2020. Scruton claimed that music could explain logic, perhaps even the entirety of it and human existence. Obviously the analytical philosophy camp in the UK and northeastern US thought that mathematics (eg, Bertrand Russell [yuk!] and others) was the key to understanding logic, while those on The Continent held to a more humanistic perspective, thankfully. Chomsky (with Piaget and others) clearly focused on the centrality of language as an expression of intelligence (ie, inherent structured thought) and also as a requirement of its development. Clearly, because of its greater range, detail, nuance and content, language takes us farther than music (limited digital tonal) and mathematics (limited digital abstract/concrete) ever can.
So when I first started working on the following diagram a few months ago during our last months before leaving Europe, I was quite certain that the irrefutable components of logic had to at least include music, mathematics, and language.
Subtext1: I’m aware that this is not complete and that it obviously leaves out physicality/timing/spatiality, if I were to assume that the four basic intelligences (variably defined as verbal [ie, auditory digital], tonal [ie, auditory tonal], visual and kinesthetic) should be represented; to be sure, that list of four basic intelligences is for some people far too basic and they would have it go to at least seven, and/or take out something from the basic four that I initially learned and accepted.
Subtext2: I am also aware that in the previous two paragraphs I am intermixing logic with intelligence and arguably mixing both of those with something even more vague called “preference” or “expression” but I’m still going to leave it as it is for now.
From my own perspective, I also have to include the entirety of the natural sciences as an expression of and means to acquire this thing that we call logic; hence, I included it in the new diagram that I just made spontaneously today, as you can see below. What I’m looking for in this relationship (diagramed above and below) is something that requires logic to understand but also develops logic in the fight to understand it; further it should be such that the effect on logic/cognition overflows into other areas.
One thing leads to another: I don’t know if we really have to work to establish this as a fact or if we can simply accept it especially in light of the so-called “Mozart effect” but I’m assuming that we have consensus that development in one area tends to promote development in other areas even if they’re not addressed directly. I’m sure some people can support or refute that in the comments below.
A few months ago I made a spontaneous video which I titled "5 components of expressive logic: accuracy, nonfallacy, informed, teleologic, nonpsychopathic” which obviously takes yet a different approach to this entire topic of logic, which in this case we might label as “practical logic” or “practicality.” Whatever we call it, I've included it here because it's short and related to these same topics—you'll have to forgive any shortcomings because it was spontaneous, caffeinated but unfed, and influenced by Metallica playing in the background.
I’ve thoroughly enjoyed the following video documentary and am happy to finally have an excuse to share it. It goes along with many of my ideas about architecture, city planning and the effects that these have on society.
