more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
In the classical or realist view of logic the meaning of abstract symbols for logical connectives is given by the truth-tables for the symbol.
Gist of Idea
In classical/realist logic the connectives are defined by truth-tables
Source
Michèle Friend (Introducing the Philosophy of Mathematics [2007])
Book Ref
Friend,Michèle: 'Introducing the Philosophy of Mathematics' [Acumen 2007], p.128
A Reaction
Presumably this is realist because it connects them to 'truth', but only if that involves a fairly 'realist' view of truth. You could, of course, translate 'true' and 'false' in the table to empty (formalist) symbols such a 0 and 1. Logic is electronics.
| 19195 | Truth tables give prior conditions for logic, but are outside the system, and not definitions [Tarski] |
| 9537 | Truth-tables are good for showing invalidity [Lemmon] |
| 9538 | A truth-table test is entirely mechanical, but this won't work for more complex logic [Lemmon] |
| 19060 | Truth-tables are dubious in some cases, and may be a bad way to explain connective meaning [Dummett] |
| 9724 | Until the 1960s the only semantics was truth-tables [Enderton] |
| 9738 | Each line of a truth table is a model [Fitting/Mendelsohn] |
| 13705 | Truth tables assume truth functionality, and are just pictures of truth functions [Sider] |
| 8713 | In classical/realist logic the connectives are defined by truth-tables [Friend] |
| 17764 | Boolean connectives are interpreted as functions on the set {1,0} [Walicki] |