Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'Paper of December 1676' and 'works'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


7 ideas

5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 2. History of Logic
Gentzen introduced a natural deduction calculus (NK) in 1934 [Gentzen, by Read]
     Full Idea: Gentzen introduced a natural deduction calculus (NK) in 1934.
     From: report of Gerhard Gentzen (works [1938]) by Stephen Read - Thinking About Logic Ch.8
5. Theory of Logic / E. Structures of Logic / 2. Logical Connectives / a. Logical connectives
The inferential role of a logical constant constitutes its meaning [Gentzen, by Hanna]
     Full Idea: Gentzen argued that the inferential role of a logical constant constitutes its meaning.
     From: report of Gerhard Gentzen (works [1938]) by Robert Hanna - Rationality and Logic 5.3
     A reaction: Possibly inspired by Wittgenstein's theory of meaning as use? This idea was the target of Prior's famous connective 'tonk', which has the role of implying anything you like, proving sentences which are not logical consequences.
The logical connectives are 'defined' by their introduction rules [Gentzen]
     Full Idea: The introduction rules represent, as it were, the 'definitions' of the symbols concerned, and the elimination rules are no more, in the final analysis, than the consequences of these definitions.
     From: Gerhard Gentzen (works [1938]), quoted by Stephen Read - Thinking About Logic Ch.8
     A reaction: If an introduction-rule (or a truth table) were taken as fixed and beyond dispute, then it would have the status of a definition, since there would be nothing else to appeal to. So is there anything else to appeal to here?
Each logical symbol has an 'introduction' rule to define it, and hence an 'elimination' rule [Gentzen]
     Full Idea: To every logical symbol there belongs precisely one inference figure which 'introduces' the symbol ..and one which 'eliminates' it. The introductions represent the 'definitions' of the symbols concerned, and eliminations are consequences of these.
     From: Gerhard Gentzen (works [1938], II.5.13), quoted by Ian Rumfitt - "Yes" and "No" III
     A reaction: [1935 paper] This passage is famous, in laying down the basics of natural deduction systems of logic (ones using only rules, and avoiding axioms). Rumfitt questions whether Gentzen's account gives the sense of the connectives.
6. Mathematics / B. Foundations for Mathematics / 4. Axioms for Number / g. Incompleteness of Arithmetic
Gentzen proved the consistency of arithmetic from assumptions beyond arithmetic [Gentzen, by Musgrave]
     Full Idea: Gentzen proved the consistency of arithmetic from assumptions which transcend arithmetic.
     From: report of Gerhard Gentzen (works [1938]) by Alan Musgrave - Logicism Revisited §5
     A reaction: This does not contradict Gödel's famous result, but reinforces it. The interesting question is what assumptions Gentzen felt he had to make.
17. Mind and Body / A. Mind-Body Dualism / 7. Zombies
It's impossible, but imagine a body carrying on normally, but with no mind [Leibniz]
     Full Idea: If it could be supposed that a body exists without a mind, then a man would do everything in the same way as if he did not have a mind, and men would speak and write the same things, without knowing what they do. ...But this supposition is impossible.
     From: Gottfried Leibniz (Paper of December 1676 [1676], A6.3.400), quoted by Daniel Garber - Leibniz:Body,Substance,Monad 5
     A reaction: This is clearly the zombie dream, three centuries before Robert Kirk's modern invention of the idea. Leibniz's reason for denying the possibility of zombies won't be the modern physicalist reason.
21. Aesthetics / C. Artistic Issues / 7. Art and Morality
Musical performance can reveal a range of virtues [Damon of Ath.]
     Full Idea: In singing and playing the lyre, a boy will be likely to reveal not only courage and moderation, but also justice.
     From: Damon (fragments/reports [c.460 BCE], B4), quoted by (who?) - where?