Combining Texts

Ideas for '', 'Explanatory Coherence' and 'Intermediate Logic'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts


12 ideas

4. Formal Logic / A. Syllogistic Logic / 2. Syllogistic Logic
Venn Diagrams map three predicates into eight compartments, then look for the conclusion [Bostock]
     Full Idea: Venn Diagrams are a traditional method to test validity of syllogisms. There are three interlocking circles, one for each predicate, thus dividing the universe into eight possible basic elementary quantifications. Is the conclusion in a compartment?
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 3.8)
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / b. Terminology of PL
'Disjunctive Normal Form' is ensuring that no conjunction has a disjunction within its scope [Bostock]
     Full Idea: 'Disjunctive Normal Form' (DNF) is rearranging the occurrences of ∧ and ∨ so that no conjunction sign has any disjunction in its scope. This is achieved by applying two of the distribution laws.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.6)
'Conjunctive Normal Form' is ensuring that no disjunction has a conjunction within its scope [Bostock]
     Full Idea: 'Conjunctive Normal Form' (CNF) is rearranging the occurrences of ∧ and ∨ so that no disjunction sign has any conjunction in its scope. This is achieved by applying two of the distribution laws.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.6)
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / d. Basic theorems of PL
'Disjunction' says that Γ,φ∨ψ|= iff Γ,φ|= and Γ,ψ|= [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Disjunction says that Γ,φ∨ψ |= iff Γ,φ |= and Γ,ψ |=.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.G)
     A reaction: That is, a disjunction leads to a contradiction if they each separately lead to contradictions.
'Assumptions' says that a formula entails itself (φ|=φ) [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Assumptions says that any formula entails itself, i.e. φ |= φ. The principle depends just upon the fact that no interpretation assigns both T and F to the same formula.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.A)
     A reaction: Thus one can introduce φ |= φ into any proof, and then use it to build more complex sequents needed to attain a particular target formula. Bostock's principle is more general than anything in Lemmon.
'Thinning' allows that if premisses entail a conclusion, then adding further premisses makes no difference [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Thinning says that if a set of premisses entails a conclusion, then adding further premisses will still entail the conclusion. It is 'thinning' because it makes a weaker claim. If γ|=φ then γ,ψ|= φ.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.B)
     A reaction: It is also called 'premise-packing'. It is the characteristic of a 'monotonic' logic - where once something is proved, it stays proved, whatever else is introduced.
The 'conditional' is that Γ|=φ→ψ iff Γ,φ|=ψ [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Conditional Principle says that Γ |= φ→ψ iff Γ,φ |= ψ. With the addition of negation, this implies φ,φ→ψ |= ψ, which is 'modus ponens'.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.H)
     A reaction: [Second half is in Ex. 2.5.4]
'Cutting' allows that if x is proved, and adding y then proves z, you can go straight to z [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Cutting is the general point that entailment is transitive, extending this to cover entailments with more than one premiss. Thus if γ |= φ and φ,Δ |= ψ then γ,Δ |= ψ. Here φ has been 'cut out'.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.C)
     A reaction: It might be called the Principle of Shortcutting, since you can get straight to the last conclusion, eliminating the intermediate step.
'Negation' says that Γ,¬φ|= iff Γ|=φ [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Negation says that Γ,¬φ |= iff Γ |= φ. We also say that φ,¬φ |=, and hence by 'thinning on the right' that φ,¬φ |= ψ, which is 'ex falso quodlibet'.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.E)
     A reaction: That is, roughly, if the formula gives consistency, the negation gives contradiction. 'Ex falso' says that anything will follow from a contradiction.
'Conjunction' says that Γ|=φ∧ψ iff Γ|=φ and Γ|=ψ [Bostock]
     Full Idea: The Principle of Conjunction says that Γ |= φ∧ψ iff Γ |= φ and Γ |= ψ. This implies φ,ψ |= φ∧ψ, which is ∧-introduction. It is also implies ∧-elimination.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 2.5.F)
     A reaction: [Second half is Ex. 2.5.3] That is, if they are entailed separately, they are entailed as a unit. It is a moot point whether these principles are theorems of propositional logic, or derivation rules.
4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 2. Tools of Propositional Logic / e. Axioms of PL
A logic with ¬ and → needs three axiom-schemas and one rule as foundation [Bostock]
     Full Idea: For ¬,→ Schemas: (A1) |-φ→(ψ→φ), (A2) |-(φ→(ψ→ξ)) → ((φ→ψ)→(φ→ξ)), (A3) |-(¬φ→¬ψ) → (ψ→φ), Rule:DET:|-φ,|-φ→ψ then |-ψ
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 5.2)
     A reaction: A1 says everything implies a truth, A2 is conditional proof, and A3 is contraposition. DET is modus ponens. This is Bostock's compact near-minimal axiom system for proposition logic. He adds two axioms and another rule for predicate logic.
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 6. Free Logic
A 'free' logic can have empty names, and a 'universally free' logic can have empty domains [Bostock]
     Full Idea: A 'free' logic is one in which names are permitted to be empty. A 'universally free' logic is one in which the domain of an interpretation may also be empty.
     From: David Bostock (Intermediate Logic [1997], 8.6)