logic

Schopy compared feeling like you need to know logic to do philosophy is like feeling you need to read a biology textbook to digest your food

it's literally autism

>>1348758
Did he really say that? Where?

>>1348764
In the epistemology section of The World as Will and Representation

>Hence arises the remarkable fact, that while in other sciences the particular case is always proved by the rule, in logic, on the contrary, the rule must always be proved from the particular case; and even the most practised logician, if he remark that in some particular case he concludes otherwise than the rule prescribes, will always expect to find a mistake in the rule rather than in his own conclusion.

>To desire to make practical use of logic means, therefore, to desire to derive with unspeakable trouble, from general rules, that which is immediately known with the greatest certainty in the particular case. It is just as if a man were to consult mechanics as to the motion of his body, and physiology as to his digestion; and whoever has learnt logic for practical purposes is like him who would teach a beaver to make its own dam.

Based fucking Schopy blowing the fuck out whole movements in like a line

Nevertheless, he does say:

>Logic is, therefore, without practical utility; but it must nevertheless be retained, because it has philosophical interest as the special knowledge of the organisation and action of reason

>>1348658
>Is logic a branch of philosophy or a branch of math?
It's a basic human mental faculty, like very basic mathematical operations (addition, subtraction, conservation).

>Can all philosophy be reduced to logic?
No, unless you stick to analytical philosophy, maybe.

>How much logic do I need to know if I want to do serious philosophy?
If you have some scientific background, you can probably jump in and build from that.