Every now and again I look up words that I've previously presumed I know the meaning of. I looked up logic today.
This is what Answers.com gave as a definition of formal logic:
It's been about a decade or more since I last read something that not only did I not fully understand but don't really no where to start unpicking it.formal logic
n. The study of the properties of propositions and deductive reasoning by abstraction and analysis of the form rather than the content of propositions under consideration.
I will get a handle on this but I'm not too proud to ask for help (or company if anyone else think it sounds like gobblede gook).
ok - I'm off on a hunt for other definitions! ???
This demonstrates simply how far from our colloquial use of "logic" the study of "formal logic" is removed. It's the point at which philosophy and mathematics meet - a field in which names such as Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein feature heavily.
Speaking of which, if you want to read something truly impenetrable, give Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus a go. Just don't blame me if your head explodes.
Self-sucussion - the quick and easy route to superpowers!
My words but a whisper, your deafness a shout
Fermat's Last Theorem is a nice easy read that has a good explanation of the crossover between maths and formal logic.Originally Posted by darkwinter
An even simpler way to think about it is that logic has equations just like maths, they're independent of the argument itself, if you can prove the equation 'true' then you can plug appropriate data into it to prove that true...(I think)
Defendants might as well have said: Beneficent creatures from the 17th dimension use this bracelet as a beacon to locate people who need pain relief and whisk them off to their home world every night to provide help in ways unknown to our science.
Judge Frank Easterbrook commenting on the Q-Ray bracelet
"For Gods sake you're an American! Stop thinking of the consequences and blow something up" - Stan Smith, American Dad!
I think hubby has Fermat's Last Theorem - or a book along those lines, he's got tons of maths stuff but I might find it easier to access through the philosophy side. That's not to say I wouldn't tackle the maths, just I'd like a hunch first.
It's definately engaged my interest in maybe not taking logic so much for granted.
Floppit,
If you're looking for an introduction to formal logic, you may enjoy this:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3...logic++tomassi
If you prefer a here's-how-not-to-do-it, there a link onsite to this:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/
The latter links to several sites that are well worth exploring.
All good clean fun.
The style as we like is the humdrum.
You can download Lewis Carroll's The Game of Logic (and read it alongside Through the Looking Glass) - he was a major innovator in mathematical logic including a great deal of stuff around what we now call Boolean Algebra.
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/4763
"No statement should be believed because it is made by an authority." Robert Heinlein
This is turning out to be a cool thread!
I will check out the references but today I'm getting my hands grubby trying to sort some first aid training for a group of mums. I just didn't want to leave helpful replies without a response.
I'm definately going to do some reading around this, I'm cross at myself for having taken it far too much for granted but at least that can be rectified!
You should try Fermat's, Simon Singh does a grand job of simplifying it enough to understand but not too simple to be misleading
Defendants might as well have said: Beneficent creatures from the 17th dimension use this bracelet as a beacon to locate people who need pain relief and whisk them off to their home world every night to provide help in ways unknown to our science.
Judge Frank Easterbrook commenting on the Q-Ray bracelet
"For Gods sake you're an American! Stop thinking of the consequences and blow something up" - Stan Smith, American Dad!
I think the meat of this definition is where it says logic is the analysis of form rather than the content. In other words, logic can be reduced to symbol manipulation by computer program-like steps. It doesn't necessarily require intelligence to do this, since the manipulation follows established rules. The actual meaning - inside the symbols - is at another level of understanding and does not affect the logic of how one thing leads to another.
The study of the properties of propositions and deductive reasoning by abstraction and analysis of the form rather than the content of propositions under consideration.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks