112 ideas
| 5486 | Essentialism says metaphysics can't be done by analysing unreliable language [Ellis] |
| 17765 | Propositional language can only relate statements as the same or as different [Walicki] |
| 17749 | Post proved the consistency of propositional logic in 1921 [Walicki] |
| 9535 | 'Contradictory' propositions always differ in truth-value [Lemmon] |
| 9509 | That proposition that both P and Q is their 'conjunction', written P∧Q [Lemmon] |
| 9511 | We write the conditional 'if P (antecedent) then Q (consequent)' as P→Q [Lemmon] |
| 9512 | We write the 'negation' of P (not-P) as ¬ [Lemmon] |
| 9510 | That proposition that either P or Q is their 'disjunction', written P∨Q [Lemmon] |
| 9513 | We write 'P if and only if Q' as P↔Q; it is also P iff Q, or (P→Q)∧(Q→P) [Lemmon] |
| 9508 | The sign |- may be read as 'therefore' [Lemmon] |
| 9514 | If A and B are 'interderivable' from one another we may write A -||- B [Lemmon] |
| 9519 | A 'substitution-instance' is a wff formed by consistent replacing variables with wffs [Lemmon] |
| 9529 | A wff is 'inconsistent' if all assignments to variables result in the value F [Lemmon] |
| 9534 | Two propositions are 'equivalent' if they mirror one another's truth-value [Lemmon] |
| 9532 | 'Subcontrary' propositions are never both false, so that A∨B is a tautology [Lemmon] |
| 9531 | 'Contrary' propositions are never both true, so that ¬(A∧B) is a tautology [Lemmon] |
| 9516 | A 'well-formed formula' follows the rules for variables, ¬, →, ∧, ∨, and ↔ [Lemmon] |
| 9528 | A wff is a 'tautology' if all assignments to variables result in the value T [Lemmon] |
| 9530 | A wff is 'contingent' if produces at least one T and at least one F [Lemmon] |
| 9518 | A 'theorem' is the conclusion of a provable sequent with zero assumptions [Lemmon] |
| 9533 | A 'implies' B if B is true whenever A is true (so that A→B is tautologous) [Lemmon] |
| 9517 | The 'scope' of a connective is the connective, the linked formulae, and the brackets [Lemmon] |
| 9396 | DN: Given A, we may derive ¬¬A [Lemmon] |
| 9398 | ∧I: Given A and B, we may derive A∧B [Lemmon] |
| 9394 | MPP: Given A and A→B, we may derive B [Lemmon] |
| 9399 | ∧E: Given A∧B, we may derive either A or B separately [Lemmon] |
| 9401 | ∨E: Derive C from A∨B, if C can be derived both from A and from B [Lemmon] |
| 9395 | MTT: Given ¬B and A→B, we derive ¬A [Lemmon] |
| 9393 | A: we may assume any proposition at any stage [Lemmon] |
| 9400 | ∨I: Given either A or B separately, we may derive A∨B [Lemmon] |
| 9402 | RAA: If assuming A will prove B∧¬B, then derive ¬A [Lemmon] |
| 9397 | CP: Given a proof of B from A as assumption, we may derive A→B [Lemmon] |
| 9522 | 'Modus ponendo tollens' (MPT) says P, ¬(P ∧ Q) |- ¬Q [Lemmon] |
| 9526 | We can change conjunctions into negated conditionals with P→Q -||- ¬(P → ¬Q) [Lemmon] |
| 9527 | The Distributive Laws can rearrange a pair of conjunctions or disjunctions [Lemmon] |
| 9523 | De Morgan's Laws make negated conjunctions/disjunctions into non-negated disjunctions/conjunctions [Lemmon] |
| 9524 | We can change conditionals into disjunctions with P→Q -||- ¬P ∨ Q [Lemmon] |
| 9525 | We can change conditionals into negated conjunctions with P→Q -||- ¬(P ∧ ¬Q) [Lemmon] |
| 9521 | 'Modus tollendo ponens' (MTP) says ¬P, P ∨ Q |- Q [Lemmon] |
| 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] |
| 17764 | Boolean connectives are interpreted as functions on the set {1,0} [Walicki] |
| 9536 | If any of the nine rules of propositional logic are applied to tautologies, the result is a tautology [Lemmon] |
| 9539 | Propositional logic is complete, since all of its tautologous sequents are derivable [Lemmon] |
| 13909 | Write '(∀x)(...)' to mean 'take any x: then...', and '(∃x)(...)' to mean 'there is an x such that....' [Lemmon] |
| 13902 | 'Gm' says m has property G, and 'Pmn' says m has relation P to n [Lemmon] |
| 13911 | The 'symbols' are bracket, connective, term, variable, predicate letter, reverse-E [Lemmon] |
| 13910 | Our notation uses 'predicate-letters' (for 'properties'), 'variables', 'proper names', 'connectives' and 'quantifiers' [Lemmon] |
| 13904 | Universal Elimination (UE) lets us infer that an object has F, from all things having F [Lemmon] |
| 13901 | Predicate logic uses propositional connectives and variables, plus new introduction and elimination rules [Lemmon] |
| 13903 | Universal elimination if you start with the universal, introduction if you want to end with it [Lemmon] |
| 13906 | With finite named objects, we can generalise with &-Intro, but otherwise we need ∀-Intro [Lemmon] |
| 13908 | UE all-to-one; UI one-to-all; EI arbitrary-to-one; EE proof-to-one [Lemmon] |
| 13905 | If there is a finite domain and all objects have names, complex conjunctions can replace universal quantifiers [Lemmon] |
| 13900 | 'Some Frenchmen are generous' is rendered by (∃x)(Fx→Gx), and not with the conditional → [Lemmon] |
| 17752 | The empty set is useful for defining sets by properties, when the members are not yet known [Walicki] |
| 17753 | The empty set avoids having to take special precautions in case members vanish [Walicki] |
| 17759 | Ordinals play the central role in set theory, providing the model of well-ordering [Walicki] |
| 17741 | To determine the patterns in logic, one must identify its 'building blocks' [Walicki] |
| 9520 | The paradoxes of material implication are P |- Q → P, and ¬P |- P → Q [Lemmon] |
| 17747 | A 'model' of a theory specifies interpreting a language in a domain to make all theorems true [Walicki] |
| 17748 | The L-S Theorem says no theory (even of reals) says more than a natural number theory [Walicki] |
| 17763 | Axiomatic systems are purely syntactic, and do not presuppose any interpretation [Walicki] |
| 17761 | A compact axiomatisation makes it possible to understand a field as a whole [Walicki] |
| 17757 | Members of ordinals are ordinals, and also subsets of ordinals [Walicki] |
| 17758 | Ordinals are transitive sets of transitive sets; or transitive sets totally ordered by inclusion [Walicki] |
| 17755 | Ordinals are the empty set, union with the singleton, and any arbitrary union of ordinals [Walicki] |
| 17756 | The union of finite ordinals is the first 'limit ordinal'; 2ω is the second... [Walicki] |
| 17760 | Two infinite ordinals can represent a single infinite cardinal [Walicki] |
| 17762 | In non-Euclidean geometry, all Euclidean theorems are valid that avoid the fifth postulate [Walicki] |
| 17754 | Inductive proof depends on the choice of the ordering [Walicki] |
| 5468 | Properties are 'dispositional', or 'categorical' (the latter as 'block' or 'intrinsic' structures) [Ellis, by PG] |
| 5469 | The passive view of nature says categorical properties are basic, but others say dispositions [Ellis] |
| 5456 | Redness is not a property as it is not mind-independent [Ellis] |
| 5481 | Properties have powers; they aren't just ways for logicians to classify objects [Ellis] |
| 5458 | Nearly all fundamental properties of physics are dispositional [Ellis] |
| 5443 | Kripke and others have made essentialism once again respectable [Ellis] |
| 5444 | 'Individual essences' fix a particular individual, and 'kind essences' fix the kind it belongs to [Ellis] |
| 5462 | Essential properties are usually quantitatively determinate [Ellis] |
| 5448 | 'Real essence' makes it what it is; 'nominal essence' makes us categorise it a certain way [Ellis] |
| 5477 | One thing can look like something else, without being the something else [Ellis] |
| 17742 | Scotus based modality on semantic consistency, instead of on what the future could allow [Walicki] |
| 5479 | Scientific essentialists say science should define the limits of the possible [Ellis] |
| 5483 | Essentialists deny possible worlds, and say possibilities are what is compatible with the actual world [Ellis] |
| 5447 | Metaphysical necessities are true in virtue of the essences of things [Ellis] |
| 5476 | Essentialists say natural laws are in a new category: necessary a posteriori [Ellis] |
| 5478 | Imagination tests what is possible for all we know, not true possibility [Ellis] |
| 5482 | Possible worlds realism is only needed to give truth conditions for modals and conditionals [Ellis] |
| 5453 | Essentialists mostly accept the primary/secondary qualities distinction [Ellis] |
| 5466 | Primary qualities are number, figure, size, texture, motion, configuration, impenetrability and (?) mass [Ellis] |
| 5485 | Emeralds are naturally green, and only an external force could turn them blue [Ellis] |
| 5484 | Essentialists don't infer from some to all, but from essences to necessary behaviour [Ellis] |
| 5457 | Predicates assert properties, values, denials, relations, conventions, existence and fabrications [Ellis, by PG] |
| 5488 | Regularity theories of causation cannot give an account of human agency [Ellis] |
| 5489 | Humans have variable dispositions, and also power to change their dispositions [Ellis] |
| 5490 | Essentialism fits in with Darwinism, but not with extreme politics of left or right [Ellis] |
| 5472 | Natural kinds are of objects/substances, or events/processes, or intrinsic natures [Ellis] |
| 5471 | Essentialism says natural kinds are fundamental to nature, and determine the laws [Ellis] |
| 5446 | For essentialists two members of a natural kind must be identical [Ellis] |
| 5480 | The whole of our world is a natural kind, so all worlds like it necessarily have the same laws [Ellis] |
| 5445 | Essentialists regard inanimate objects as genuine causal agents [Ellis] |
| 5463 | Essentialists believe causation is necessary, resulting from dispositions and circumstances [Ellis] |
| 5491 | A general theory of causation is only possible in an area if natural kinds are involved [Ellis] |
| 5442 | For 'passivists' behaviour is imposed on things from outside [Ellis] |
| 5473 | The laws of nature imitate the hierarchy of natural kinds [Ellis] |
| 5474 | Laws of nature tend to describe ideal things, or ideal circumstances [Ellis] |
| 5475 | We must explain the necessity, idealisation, ontology and structure of natural laws [Ellis] |
| 5460 | Causal relations cannot be reduced to regularities, as they could occur just once [Ellis] |
| 5459 | Essentialists say dispositions are basic, rather than supervenient on matter and natural laws [Ellis] |
| 5461 | The essence of uranium is its atomic number and its electron shell [Ellis] |
| 5464 | For essentialists, laws of nature are metaphysically necessary, being based on essences of natural kinds [Ellis] |
| 5487 | Essentialism requires a clear separation of semantics, epistemology and ontology [Ellis] |