Logic, as we know it and understand it, is an attempt at regulating language so that certain attributes (almost always, truth) are consistent throughout the communication.
It is a very powerful tool because it allows us to effectively communicate and analyse rational and correct ideas. It is not, unfortunately, a transcendent truth.
The logic we use (as compared to some perfect ideal logic) is a human construct, and therefore is influenced by culture. This means that cultures have used different logics (some of which are better than others), logic is influenced by concrete human relations, and logic does not necessarily transcend history or gender (or class, or race, etc).
If we are discussing how humans actually use logic (instead of some ideal perfect logic that we attempt to attain but rarely reach), then there is nothing incorrect in saying that the imperfect and human attempts we make to attain this perfect ideal are diverse, and are influnced by our historical contexts.
So, if you believe I am misusing it now because of my bias, it is also logical to assume that sexist men have also misused logic according to their biases.
As long as your answer was, it was not an answer to my questions. Let's try again:
Which logics are better than others? Why? How does logic not transcend gender, class or race? Why no examples?
I'm not interested in vague generalities about "different logics". I want details. Which logics are better than others? Classical? Ternary? Fuzzy? Paraconsistent? Non-monotonic? What rules of inference do not transcend gender, class or race? I already asked, for example, whether the law of non-contradiction does or does not transcend these factors. Well, does it or doesn't it? If not, why?
I am not interested in more beating around the bush from you. Do not think you can weasel out of this. Answer my questions. I demand Ebuhdins™ for your claims.
Truth To Power wrote:Your source makes the absurd claim that there must a God for atheists not to believe in.
The widespread belief in kami is not atheistic.
A broader problem with claims people make about Japan is that it is overall an über-rational utopia. If that were the case, then belief that blood types influence personality would not be so widespread either.