Knowing and the Mystique of Logic and Rules

rules of language have no significance in language production and understanding, being descriptions of linguistic styles;
analysis of computer modelling of the mental activity shows that in describing human knowing the computer is irrelevant;

---

Human knowing is examined as it emerges from classical empirical psychology, with its ramifications into language, computing, science, and scholarship. While the discussion takes empirical support from a wide range, claims for the significance of logic and rules are challenged throughout. Highlights of the discussion:

knowing is a matter of habits or dispositions that guide the person's stream of consciousness;
rules of language have no significance in language production and understanding, being descriptions of linguistic styles;
statements that may be true or false enter into ordinary linguistic activity, not as elements of messages, but merely as summaries of situations, with a view to action;
in computer programming the significance of logic, proof, and formalized description, is incidental and subject to the programmer's personality;
analysis of computer modelling of the mental activity shows that in describing human knowing the computer is irrelevant;
in accounting for the scholarly/scientific activity, logic and rules are impotent;
a novel theory: scholarship and science have coherent descriptions as their core.

The discussion addresses questions that are basic to advanced applications of computers and to students of language and science.