So what's the logic here? The worker at the factory may not have studied logic, but he knew it was illogical. The logic he spoke of was his experience, processes of production that he had repeated thousands of times. There were some technical specifications in these production processes, and when the worker thought about production problems, he always followed these specifications, and these specifications became the rules of their rational thinking, so he calls these specifications logic. In fact, this kind of logic is not logic in the real sense, it can be said that the extended meaning of the concept of logic, this kind of logic can be violated.
Many new technologies will change the relationship between things, breaking past norms and making people feel illogical. It is not illogical, the logic that is the basic norm of rational thought has not changed. The magician's performance makes it seem illogical, a living person can be squashed. If a magician can do it, it must be logical. It's just that he hides some of the middle and props, which makes it seem illogical. In life, we treat the relationships between common things as rules that cannot be broken, and then treat these rules as rules of rational thought, and call these rules logic.
In addition, there is no transcendental logic in the world, even if there were, it could not be described. The logic we usually use is based on experience through induction, Western philosophers always talk about a priori logic is completely wrong. We must adopt a pragmatic attitude towards the right and wrong of logic, and whether the logic we use is correct depends on whether it solves problems, rather than whether it conforms to a priori logic.
3. Formal Logic
3.1 Subjective Things Follow Formal Logic
Logic includes formal logic and dialectical logic, both of which are the rules of rational thinking, but they are very different. Formal logic follows the law of identity, the law of exclusion of middle and the law of non-contradiction. A is A, A is not non-A, and if A belongs to B and B belongs to C, then A belongs to C. Logical relations like this belong to formal logic. What is the nature of formal logic? Why should our thinking obey the rules of formal logic?
Every objective thing is infinitely complex, and the experience or concept in the human mind is always very simple at the beginning, and then the concept can gradually develop from simple to complex. Simple concepts abide by the law of identity, that is, are always the same as themselves, expressed as A=A. It's not going to happen that A is not equal to A. In the objective world, concrete things are complicated, so it is possible that A is not equal to A. For example, I am a very different person today than I was ten years ago. You can't step into the same river twice. No two leaves in the world are the same. But in the subjective world, I, as a simple atomic concept, can never change. In order to express my change, many comments must be added to the concept of "I", for example, I of today, I of ten years ago, and so on. "I of today" is a combinatorial or molecular concept that combines the three atomic concepts of "I" , "of" and "today". This molecular concept is different from another molecular concept, "I of ten years ago," but the atomic concept of "I" has not changed. Every molecular concept is always the same as itself.