LOL I believe you may be starting to get the point. Over applying logic gives you nothing but gibberish. You are using basic terms and concepts that are not rigorously defined, but are based on your experiences and perceptions - common sense. There's nothing wrong with that, but you have to remember that common sense can be very, very wrong. Appealing to "first principles" is really just appealing to common sense, which actually makes your logical analysis less reliable then if you were starting with rigorous empirical observations and measurements.
Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist
You don't need a purely logical justification for things. You don't need first principles. When you get right down to it, those things are really nothing more then a security blanket - something that makes you feel good, but has little substance. The universe is not going to poof out of existence for lack of logic. Life is still life, even without first principles. Something that's clearly wrong (like mass murder) is still clearly wrong, even if you discover that what you thought was the intellectual basis for that is deeply flawed. You don't need to be afraid of questioning your assumptions.
How reliable a logical analysis is always fundamentally depends on the quality of your initial assumptions. You can quite literally create a logical proof of absolutely anything if you tweak your assumptions appropriately. For example, given Hitler's assumptions, his final solution was perfectly logical.
Logic is a powerful tool, but it is still just a tool. It has its limitations, and you need to keep them in mind.
And I am most definitely not me, but that's a discussion for another time.
Bosses don't create jobs, customers do.