>>511314593
Don't know what you mean by that. People use logical fallacies deliberately as a rhetorical tool. Regardless of other people's level of knowledge of grammar, logic and rhetoric you benefit from studying all three. They used to be, and need to be, studied as a unified system. Read picrel, which is from this book >>511312915. You see there that what they referred to as logic in the past is in fact what we call grammar, logic and rhetoric today. Operations 1 and 2 there are in the domain of grammar, operation 3 is what we call logic, operation 4 is what we call rhetoric.

>>510172721
>With the trivium perhaps?
Yes you need all three subjects, grammar, logic, rhetoric. These were studied as a unified system in the past. When I say logic I really mean the trivium. These were basically one subject in the past. What they called logic then was the trivium, not what we call logic today which has been divorced from grammar and rhetoric, even though this logic is a part of the whole. This book comes from that tradition where logic included grammar and rhetoric, and it's a good place to start studying:

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>24533712
Sounds like you only learned about logic streamlined for use in mathematical application. Logic goes beyond that. Grammar, logic and rhetoric were removed from public school but they study it in yeshivas and in Freemasonry.

>>509832667
An NPC is someone who has not studied any logic at all. The real redpill is to realize that we are all NPCs. Most of your thoughts are conditioned responses to stimuli. In that sense we're all NPCs. Ever wonder why everybody thinks 90% of people are NPCs and yet nobody thinks they themselves are an NPC. Do the math, it doesn't add up. Thinking of yourself as a "free thinker" and pointing fingers at others and saying they are NPCs is in fact NPC behavior. What differentiates an actual thinker from a mere robot is not what pops into your head prompted by outer stimuli, but whether or not you take that response and process it further using grammar, logic and rhetoric, for example the Socratic Method. Anyone who thinks they have logic innate, don't have to study it, and thinks they can just sit down and think for a bit about whatever and they're not like those other people who are NPCs is hopelessly enslaved.

>None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.

The Trivium, study it.

And Euclidean Geometry, which was removed from public schools in the 1950s, it was the last vestige of logic in public schools.

https://youtu.be/hq_tG5UJMs0

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>509648058
That's great. I've mostly studied logic, I'm trying to study more grammar and rhetoric. For grammar I downloaded Wheelock's Latin, because in the Trivium in the classical education it was Latin and Greek grammar they studied. I don't know a lot about rhetoric and I'm trying to find good materials. I have The Trivium by Miriam Joseph, haven't read it, don't know if I will because it's a female author, but anyway it seems like only a small part of it deals with rhetoric, one or two chapters I think it was. I have this book by Isaac Watts which I'm reading. What's interesting is that it seems like what we today call grammar, logic and rhetoric were all called logic in the past, they were taught as a unified system, and this book seems to come from that tradition. It has both grammar and rhetoric. Rhetoric he calls "disposition" or "method", part 4 of the book is about this.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

One of the important concepts in rhetoric is the enthymeme. Reading this article was helpful. Also, I read a part of Introduction to Logic by Irving Copi. All logic books I've read had flaws and I think this was no exception, but I think the best thing is to read various materials and learn something from each. Anyway it had a very interesting passage on how an enthymeme can be just one proposition.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enthymeme

>>509562719
see >>509559754
Grammar, logic and rhetoric are interconnected, you need all three.

Don't know what you mean by "just to be more critical of their own kneejerk reactions". In public school we were brainwashed to think "thinking critically" is to just sit down and think a little bit, ask some questions, whatever. This is a meme. Worthless. We were not taught to think critically in public school. As I said before when you actually open a book on critical thinking a big part of it is logic.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>508083667
>just saying words
No matter what we talk about it's just words. Semantics, despite the phrase "just semantics" is in fact of perhaps greater value than anything. That's why I'm studying grammar, logic and rhetoric. We've been brainwashed to think grammar and logic are boring things, but I can't think of anything more interesting or deeper. But I know what you mean, using words without meaning, many people on this board are very lacking in the art of using words right, we were never taught this art but have to study it on our own.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>22846205
>just saying words
No matter what we talk about it's just words. Semantics, despite the phrase "just semantics" is in fact of perhaps greater value than anything. That's why I'm studying grammar, logic and rhetoric. We've been brainwashed to think grammar and logic are boring things, but I can't think of anything more interesting or deeper. But I know what you mean, using words without meaning, many people on this board are very lacking in the art of using words right, we were never taught this art but have to study it on our own.

https://archive.org/details/logicorrightuseo00watt

>>508078421
Here's a sample.