How can there be 'evil logic'?

[VulcanGuy]

I was watching the Voyager episode earlier where the doctor tries to expand his program by absorbing the holo personalities of successful people in history and he chooses a Vulcan. B'Lanna realises that the Vulcan he chose used logic 'ruthlessly', how is this possible? Isn't logic supposed to be impartial?

Thanks

 

[JNG]

Not everyone's working on the same logic. Random example off the top of my head: some people find the death penalty eminently logical (say, in the case of a murderer—one takes a life and loses one's own, removing threat to society) and some find it the exact opposite (if killing is wrong, then how can it be right as a penalty?). That sort of thing.

I don't have too much trouble picturing ruthless applications of logic, myself. I imagine Kodos thought there was a certain logic to his position...

 

[VulcanGuy]

Not everyone's working on the same logic. Random example off the top of my head: some people find the death penalty eminently logical (say, in the case of a murderer—one takes a life and loses one's own, removing threat to society) and some find it the exact opposite (if killing is wrong, then how can it be right as a penalty?). That sort of thing.

I don't have too much trouble picturing ruthless applications of logic, myself. I imagine Kodos thought there was a certain logic to his position...

oh alright, thanks man.

was there ever a book released on Vulcan logic btw?

 

[Finn]

It was explained in the episode that her logic was very acute and pure (it wasn't said with those words but you get the idea). Her logic was so acute and pure it had no compassion so it might come off as "evil". Kinda like the logic/reasoning the supercomputer in I, Robot and and a certain movie that came out last year, had.

 

[Kaziarl]

I was watching the Voyager episode earlier where the doctor tries to expand his program by absorbing the holo personalities of successful people in history and he chooses a Vulcan. B'Lanna realises that the Vulcan he chose used logic 'ruthlessly', how is this possible? Isn't logic supposed to be impartial?

Thanks

Here's an example, which I think is what Kodos the Executioner actually did. You have your world thats on the brink of starvation. They are all going to die if you don't find a solution. You could change farming techniques to increase food production, but that takes time. So the quickest solution, and therefor the logical choice, would be to kill half the populace. Just line them up and shoot every other one. That way demand for food is decreased immediately. Although your people might find it evil, you've just made a logical choice.

 

[The Badger]

Strictly speaking all logic should be the same. If everyone has the exact same data to begin with, and applies the exact same logical thought processes, then everyone will come to the same conclusions.
However, sometimes it is not feasible to start with the same data. Some factors, such as how much value we place upon someone's life, are value judgements that can not easily be quantified. So depending on what values we have, we can get very different results even if using the same thought processes.
Many aspects of Vulcan philosophy show that their value systems can lead to unusual results. Consider their vegetarianism. If one believes that the life of an animal has significant value, then vegetarianism can follow logically. However, if one is in a situation where the only choices are to eat meat or die of starvation, then the only logical reason to avoid eating meat is if one genuinely believed the life of an animal to be of equal, or greater, worth to that of an intelligent reasoning being. And if the animal is already dead, cooked, and being offered to you on a plate, there is no logical reason to even hesitate.

So yes, logic itself is impartial. But the value judgements we ourselves make are not, and can lead to vastly differing conclusions.

 

[Timo]

Here's an example, which I think is what Kodos the Executioner actually did. You have your world thats on the brink of starvation. They are all going to die if you don't find a solution. You could change farming techniques to increase food production, but that takes time. So the quickest solution, and therefor the logical choice, would be to kill half the populace. Just line them up and shoot every other one. That way demand for food is decreased immediately. Although your people might find it evil, you've just made a logical choice.

Well, not really. Unless the timescale worked out just right, Kodos would have had to kill all the people before there was hope of more food. Or then he wouldn't have to kill anybody, because people could easily survive with zero food for several weeks. And there is no indication in the episode that Kodos would have been facing the right sort of time window. Rather, he just made flimsy excuses for satisfying his murderous urges.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Kaziarl]

Here's an example, which I think is what Kodos the Executioner actually did. You have your world thats on the brink of starvation. They are all going to die if you don't find a solution. You could change farming techniques to increase food production, but that takes time. So the quickest solution, and therefor the logical choice, would be to kill half the populace. Just line them up and shoot every other one. That way demand for food is decreased immediately. Although your people might find it evil, you've just made a logical choice.

Well, not really. Unless the timescale worked out just right, Kodos would have had to kill all the people before there was hope of more food. Or then he wouldn't have to kill anybody, because people could easily survive with zero food for several weeks. And there is no indication in the episode that Kodos would have been facing the right sort of time window. Rather, he just made flimsy excuses for satisfying his murderous urges.

Timo Saloniemi

Its been a`while since i've seen that one so i dont remember the details

 

[VulcanGuy]

It was explained in the episode that her logic was very acute and pure (it wasn't said with those words but you get the idea). Her logic was so acute and pure it had no compassion so it might come off as "evil". Kinda like the logic/reasoning the supercomputer in I, Robot and and a certain movie that came out last year, had.

See, I thought all Vulcans used the same type of logic and therefore had the same pillars, including "All individual sentient life being sacred."

 

[Timo]

So yes, logic itself is impartial. But the value judgements we ourselves make are not, and can lead to vastly differing conclusions.

I'd rather argue that it's not the choices made on source data that are "value judgements", but that the desired outcome of the process is. Logic as applied on any complex problem will falter on the massive complexity: there will always be a thousand possible outcomes, differing chaotically from each other due to the wealth of source data. But logic is there to serve the desire to reach a specific outcome through the most rational means available.

Basically, Vulcans, too, seem to choose their conclusions, and then devise the logic that takes them there. They are traditionalists and idealists who want life to happen in a certain manner, and they twist the circumstances to achieve that. Their adherence to reason just helps them do that more efficiently than if they went through traditional, partially irrational or irrelevant procedure, or without organized procedure at all.

A non-logical person would simply accept "All individual sentient life is sacred" as an axiom; a logical one would find rational excuses to follow that axiom.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[The Badger]

I'd rather argue that it's not the choices made on source data that are "value judgements", but that the desired outcome of the process is.

A valid point. I'd suggest then that both the original source data and the desired outcome can often be value judgements.
Of course, sometimes one will be dealing solely with objective facts. In these situations those who apply pure logic correctly will inevitably draw the same conclusion.

 

[ubdu]

Don´t you think, Star Trek (and in consequence this thread) mistakes logic for rationality?
Logic is a system of theorems. It´s mainly a mathemathical and philosophical tool, to prove/disprove propositions.

Rationality can be basis for decisions and form the mindset of people. Rationality will put reason over emotion - I think, this is the central point of Vulcan philosophy. It´s not so much about right and wrong, but about how to come to decisions - you should rather use your brain than your heart.

As to Right and Wrong: a rational decision as well as an emotional decision can be right AND wrong - depending on the set of values you apply.

 

[cultcross]

See, I thought all Vulcans used the same type of logic and therefore had the same pillars, including "All individual sentient life being sacred."

However, they also practice "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" which seems to contradict this idea. Whilst impeccably logical, and noble when applied to self-sacrifice, it also expressly permits 'tyranny of the majority'. Logic can be used to justify what most would consider morally wrong. Because sometimes morals aren't as black and white as a logical thought process.

 

[VulcanGuy]

See, I thought all Vulcans used the same type of logic and therefore had the same pillars, including "All individual sentient life being sacred."

Whilst impeccably logical, and noble when applied to self-sacrifice, it also expressly permits 'tyranny of the majority'.

is self-sacrifice really condoned in the federation? self-sacrifice is akin to cannibalism or murder except you are taking your own life.

 

[Kaziarl]

See, I thought all Vulcans used the same type of logic and therefore had the same pillars, including "All individual sentient life being sacred."

Whilst impeccably logical, and noble when applied to self-sacrifice, it also expressly permits 'tyranny of the majority'.

is self-sacrifice really condoned in the federation? self-sacrifice is akin to cannibalism or murder except you are taking your own life.

self sacrifice is simply where you put others before yourself. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

It has nothing to do with murder, or cannibalism. I'm really not sure were you got that comparison.

 

[roguephoenix]

logic can be highly subjective. changes with point of view, values, etc. lots of variables.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Logic is very likely to be evil. Say you can save 100 people by killing one person. The logical thing to do is to kill that one person. Only emotion would argue the contrary.

That's why I've never trusted Vulcans.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Logic is process, not content. The conclusions one comes to ultimately depend greatly upon one's premises.

 

[Deks]

'Evil' is a ridiculous term to begin with.
Outdated and primitive.

When Torres mentioned ruthless, it more alluded to the possibility it was highly rigid application of logic and strictness with no flexibility.
Using logic to justify various/extreme positions and points of views.
If you have good enough arguments (regardless of the situation) you can justify just about everything with logic.

 

[The Badger]

Logic is very likely to be evil. Say you can save 100 people by killing one person. The logical thing to do is to kill that one person. Only emotion would argue the contrary.

If there were other options with a high priority of success I'd agree with you. But if there were no other options, or if there were options with no realistic chance of success, it would be morally wrong to let one hundred people die just to save one.
Remember when Deanna Troi took her command tests? In order to pass, she had to be prepared to send a friend to certain death in order to save the rest of the crew. Would you say that decision was 'evil'?
Whilst I would never claim it is always justified, it certainly can be in many situations.