Propostional Logic Symposia - [1] - Introduction and Basics

[VideCorSpoon]

Ok. I can appreciate your opinion. It makes some sense.

But the “golden rule” is a solidified formal logic axiom. You can’t argue with it… especially that particular one. I think we all can agree that logic is a closed system, I don’t argue with you there.

I’m fascinated by your incorporation of the precise word “thought object” in logical subsystems though... interesting terminology.

So that's my two cents… which make four cents overall. Twenty-one more cents and we can get a gumball.

[Arjen]

*places two more cents on the table*

You should check out Gottlob Frege. He is the one who devised the first form of formal logics and its notations. There is a topic on him and the forming of thought-objects here. I think you also replied in it once or twice.

Anyway, Try to realise wht logic is instead of looking for its links with "reality". Logic is not a way to determine "reality". It is a way to determine thought-objects.

[VideCorSpoon]

We must be getting lost in translation at some point. In Posts #15 and #21 I state very clearly (at least I hope) that “logic is a closed system.” Again, within this “closed system” in post #15, “…the sky could be pink and elephants could have wings.” Plainly… within the world of logical subsystems reality can be determined depending on the variables and truth values you have.

Logic is a way to determine “reality” but it does so in an abstract way. Within the closed system, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln killed a thousand Nazi’s at Gettysburg in the year 2605.

Also try to keep in mind and this is very important…logic has moved on and has been expounded and improved upon since Gottlob Frege like cosmology has moved on since the renaissance. His contribution is great no doubt, but the system has changed and better theories have been developed much like Aristotelian logic has evolved into categorical syllogisms. We do not refer to Aristotle and his thoughts of abstractive forms to refer to the evolved form of categorical syllogisms of Venn diagrams. Aristotle established the foundations, but John Venn improved upon it. Basically put… thought objects are a specific theory of Gottlob Frege, but do not apply to logic in general today... unless you subscribe to his theory.

[Arjen]

1) I think what you call abstract reasonings I call thought-objects.
2) I know logic has moved on since Frege. I say so in my opening post on Frege. The reason I point to him is because foundations are very important. When one understands the foundations one can understand the limits of the system. The foundations of logic are thought objects and I was of the impression that you are trying to make for a "loophole" so that logic can be applied as a system to deduce truth in "reality". I am beginning to think I am wrong...am I?

[VideCorSpoon]

Foundations are very important. The foundations I'm trying to convey are the foundations of formal logic, much like trying to speak a different language. I hate to burst your bubble, but logic is like that. I wish it were a little more poetic and open to creative license, but its not really like that. Its like math...

Reality is a relative term in logic. We are displacing our reality in the extended world for the closed system on paper within the proof. I really don't know how else to convey this point.

It's not that you are wrong... actually far from it. You have a valid point. But the symposia is meant to show readers the way to do formal logic, not get tangled up in the bureaucracy of the definition of logic and its relation to the world according to personal opinion or preference.

[Arjen]

VideCorSpoon, honestly in every post you write on this you are stating things in which I think that you have completely missed the point and completely understood the point.

What I am asserting to is that indeed from your posts people might get the idea that logic is related directly to reality. If that would be the case it would be very easy for people to confuse the workings in their mind with the workings in reality. This is the definition of psychoses and I think very important to keep an eye on. Apart from that it is one of the basic rules in logic. Logic is a tool, nothing more, nothing less. Be carefull with the usage of the tool is all I guess.

[VideCorSpoon]

Ok... that sounds fine.

But keep this in mind from the very beginning of the symposium...

But this is not a debate… don’t argue because I’m not going to oblige you. This is meant to show fellow aspiring philosophy lovers how to perform a philosophical method and address any questions they may have, whether that help come from me or some other member. Also remember to ask any questions, even if you think it may be dumb, because it is not. It takes awhile to get used to this type of systemic process. I’ll repeat and clarify anything if you ask me to.

[Arjen]

Ok, I can take a hint. I just think it is really important to realise what the logical system can and cannot do. But I'll get out of the topic in the way I have been in it.