When a person tells anyone who cares to hear that all apples are red because they steam off desire – it might be very obvious the speaker might have made a bit of a Logical wrong turn somewhere.
they might have noticed that (some) apples are Red and decided all of them support that colour.
then they might have noticed a european trend from more christian zeal times, to paint red apples as linked to “original sin”, hence somehow mean sexual desire.
To top that, the person might have added a “steam off” as a personal touch.
Now all these suppositions might be wrong – but for now, lets assume for this topic instance that they are a correct account of what lead to the statement – because the idea is to try and be in the transmission between logic and reason.
In that vibration between being reasonable and logical, i think the example has a certain point. Anyone who checked a bit of logical satements can recognise the fallacy.
However, the process of getting to the fallacy, is not necessarily fallacious in itself. Indeed, it can be deemed as a reasoned process because we can trace back the steps. If it was:
I feel that apples are red etc. and this feeling just makes me feel good, i think the statement would be more of an arbitrary one, and bring different question sets to the discussion.
It seems that because the ability to trace the steps in the argument, and the supposed person’s saying that they are being reasonable – that they said XYZ as a reasoned statement – then in the statement can indeed be subjected to questions of reasoning.
In that light, reasoning is an ability to, for example, use a cause + effect sequence to discuss stuff. Being reasonable in this case does not mean Logical, as in using logic to arrive at conclusions, but using a reasoning process that can be – if appropriate – checked via logical processes.
Hence, in this case,
It might be argued that the conclusion of all aplles are red opens up a transmission between logic and reason, a transmission that might check the statement for logical errors.
These are Logical errors. Not necessarily cognitive, or perceptive errors. It can then be said that after the transmission between logic and reason, the person could say that For Them, in their minds – all apples are Red. It places the statement into a particular context ofcourse, however, beiong logically incorrect, does not mean X is utterly “wrong”, only can not claim to be logically true..
Indeed, perhaps the transmission between logic and reason might create an abstractive opportunity for statements, just to Be – at least for a short bright while.
Let all apples be red and steam off desires?