# Logic and its beginnings and why it is

When dealing with logic aren't we supposed to question logic, as though what caused it and why it is and therefore ask or beg the question, "Can our basic understanding of logic be logical?" "Is the logic of logic logical?" and are there any clear answer for these questions.

This might be meta-philosophical and that meta-philosophy is not a "thing" usually nowadays, at least, I don't know a case where meta-philosophy is actively being practiced or studied.

• I think it's a good question, and I think the answer is unsatisfyingly No, logic isn't exactly logical. In other words, you can't prove logic logically. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma
– TKoL
Mar 28 at 7:19
• @TKoL thank you so much for the reference and I did have an inclination as to this being the case. Mar 28 at 7:20
• Logic as a "faculty" (i.e. reasoning) is embedded into language and we always (and unavoidably) use language to speak of language. Boys learn gramamr at school using language and books: it is "circular" but (usually) it works. Mar 28 at 7:28
• Formal logic is based on "formalization": develop an artificial language based on strict syntactical rules and rigorous semantics. Then we study properties of formal systems and language, usually using mathematical tools, and this is a branch of mathematics. Mar 28 at 7:29
• Questions like "Is the logic of logic logical?" are quite useless and often meaningless... When ìsomeone says "Is the logic of logic logical?" what he means? That we can study rigorously ("logically") formal logical systems? We do it. That there is some overarching "logic" governing all formal (logical) systems? Maybe not... That there is a unique human faculty (logic, reason) governing all human facts? It seems not. Mar 28 at 7:32

• `we can postulate that aspects of our world follow a specific logic, then apply empiricism to evaluate this hypothesis.` - love it