Go to » Web - QA - Dictionary - Encyclopedia - Images
 Web Opens New Window. Results 0 - 0 of about 0 for logic 
Sorry for the inconvenience! Unable to fulfill the request. Try the suggestions below or type a new query above.
 

 Questions 'n' Answers about 'logic' Opens New Window.

Q.Logic? .?Related Search:
Philosophy
 do you think that the universe is really logical? i know we use maths to describe the universe and logic is the foundation of math but for a moment have you ever thought that perhaps this is wrong perhaps all the laws of nature do not obey logic? trailerparkbob i gave u the thumb down for the simple reason that u suggested a read but never "ANSWERED THE QUESTION"
A.Well Im not an expert on this kind of thing, and I know what I'm about to suggest sure has gotten slung around alot by dilettantes like myself, who maybe ought to be discouraged from doing it so flip and casual like, but I'm going to suggest it anyway. I think you're looking for Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem here.
  

Q.logic.....!!?Related Search:
Jokes & Riddles
 Two farmers, Jim and Bob, are sitting at their favorite bar drinking beer. Jim turns to Bob and says, "You know, I'm tired of going through life without an education. Tomorrow I think I'll go to the Community College and sign up for some classes." Bob thinks it's a good idea, and the two leave. The next day, Jim goes down to the college and meets dean of admissions, who signs him up for the four basic classes: Math, English, History, and Logic. "Logic?" Jim says. "What's that?" The dean says, "I'll give you an example. Do you own a weed eater?" "Yeah." "Then logically speaking, because you own a weed eater, I think that you would have a yard." "That's true, I do have a yard." "I'm not done," the dean says. "Because you have a yard, I think logically that you would have a house." "Yes, I do have a house." "And because you have a house, I think that you might logically have a family." "Yes, I have a family." "I'm not done yet. Because you have a family, then logically you must have a wife. And because you have a wife, then logic tells me you're likely a heterosexual." "I am a heterosexual. That's amazing, you were able to find out all of that because I have a weed eater." Excited to take the class now, Jim shakes the Dean's hand and leaves to go meet Bob at the bar. He tells Bob about his classes, how he is signed up for Math, English, History, and Logic. "Logic?" Bob says, "What's that?" Jim says, "I'll give you an example. Do you have a weed eater?" "No." "Then you're a queer."
A.lmao very funny
  

Q........LOGIC........?Related Search:
Religion & Spirituality
 is it logical to believe science refutes God simply based on the technical layout of science? neutrons and atoms mean what? science can only theorize the creation of earth and beyond death experience... these ideals are no better then religion.... is that logic? is it logical to become an atheist bcause you disagree with religion? god is only religion? is it logical to think god can co-exist with science as the same entity, it seems impossible that EVERYTHING would come from the very depths of nothing... but here we are! why believe occurrence and not intent? does logic die? answers?... by the way Im not religious, I take turns questioning all sides of belief, and I do so respectfully so I would appreciate maturity and no trolls.... thank you :)
A.the old standby....god of the gaps.....yet another logical fallacy - There is a gap in understanding of some aspect of the natural world. Therefore the cause must be supernatural
  

Q.What are the basics of logic and what should I look for in a logic book?Related Search:
Other - Education
 I am interested in studying logic. I looked at several books in my local library but I'm not sure which one to get. There are some that say "logic" in the title and others that say "clear thinking". They are grouped together and appear to have similar content. Some have a lot about "fallacies", some only have a little info on fallacies. Some focus on mathematical proofs. How many different aspects does logic encompass? What are the basics that I need to know? I want to get a book that has everything about logic. I need to know what to look for in a book because I want to know that I am getting a book that has a complete explanation of logic so that I don't miss out on anything. I don't want to get a book that leaves anything out. Do you know of any good books or websites about logic?
A.A text that gives you a good slow introduction into deductive reasoning and the logical fallacies is key, in my opinion, since that sets a solid foundation for logic in general. The "mathematical proofs" you refer to are actually an area of "Symbolic Logic", which is an interesting foundation of logic in general. The symbols represent ideas, which in turn represent...well, everything! You may actually want to get a seperate text on Symbolic Logic, and begin to study the two aspects together. I'm afraid a book that contains everything about logic would probably require a small moving van to be shuttled around! You'll no doubt need to have multiple books and websites that address the topics on their own. Some things I'd suggest to look for in such books: -Written in a way that engages you and reviews it in a manner you're open to, rather than being dull and difficult. -Used copy, and marked with highlighter/sidenotes from previous owners. -A well-published author you can reference online for further studies.
  

Q.What is the difference between Logic Studio and Logic Express?Related Search:
Software
 What is the difference between Logic Studio and Logic Express? For a home user, what extra does Logic Studio hold? Is it needed?
A.This all depends on how intense of a user you are. I'm a Music Producer and anything with "Express" in the name does me no good. But if you have a music hobby your trying to satisfy and your just messin around then express maybe for you. Unfortunately, express will give you the bare minimums and a lot of times these types of versions won't even allow you to save your work because they want you to buy the Full version. GOOD LUCK!!
  

Q.What's the difference between Logic Studio Upgrade and Logic Studio?Related Search:
Software
 I want to get Logic Studio but if i buy the Upgrade, would it install the full set: All Jam Packs, Logic Studio and the rest?
A.Yes. By itself it is $499. For an upgrade, $299. It comes with all the bells and whistles that you would with a full version.
  

Q.How do you apply logic to dating and finding the right woman?Related Search:
Singles & Dating
 I have had a few discussions with friends about this and all of them say that logic and anything that has to do with love does not go together. I am trying to prove that logic is the key ingredient when it comes to love, dating, and relationships. Please help me find the words I am looking for.
A.The key to relationships is to use you head to keep your heart from doing something stupid before you do it, but to let you heart make the final choices. Seek out a group of friends and potential mates, based on charachter and other qualities that you think you want int a mate, and to avoid people who do not have qualities that you find desireable. For example, hang out in circles where you might find an intelligent or responsible or morally upright person (church, study groups, chairity/community service events, etc.), or use a dating site that allows you to screen for such qualities. Then you should get to know as many people as possible on a casual level. After that, you have to let you emotions and your sexuality rule your choices. If you go after anyone you are strongly attracted to, regardless of any other quality, and don't try to limit your choices, you may end up with a really hot loser scum bag who will end up hurting you or with whom you will eventually get fed up, or somebody that bores you to death or annoys you except when you are sucking face. On the other hand, if you refuse to consider somebody who didn't go to college, or something, or doesn't attend church or volunteer, or somebody who doesn't make a certain ammount of money, then you might end up in a relationship with somebody who has all the right qualities on paper, but who you are not really that excited about or attracted to, or can't make a connection with. Above all, avoid being so picky or so closed off that you don't date anybody, or are afraid to ask anybody out, and don't cling to the first person who is interested in you. Besides that, once you are in a relationship or an almost reletionship, don't let that person treat you badly, or ignore you, no matter how much you like them. Liking them is only half of the matter.
  
 Dictionary Opens New Window.
5 definitions found for logic:

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48:

Logic \Log"ic\, n. [OE. logike, F. logique, L. logica, logice,
   Gr. logikh` (sc. te`chnh), fr. logiko`s belonging to speaking
   or reason, fr. lo`gos speech, reason, le`gein to say, speak.
   See Legend.]
   1. The science or art of exact reasoning, or of pure and
      formal thought, or of the laws according to which the
      processes of pure thinking should be conducted; the
      science of the formation and application of general
      notions; the science of generalization, judgment,
      classification, reasoning, and systematic arrangement; the
      science of correct reasoning.
      [1913 Webster]

            Logic is the science of the laws of thought, as
            thought; that is, of the necessary conditions to
            which thought, considered in itself, is subject.
                                                  --Sir W.
                                                  Hamilton.
      [1913 Webster]

   Note: Logic is distinguished as pure and applied. "Pure logic
         is a science of the form, or of the formal laws, of
         thinking, and not of the matter. Applied logic teaches
         the application of the forms of thinking to those
         objects about which men do think." --Abp. Thomson.
         [1913 Webster]

   2. A treatise on logic; as, Mill's Logic.
      [1913 Webster]

   3. correct reasoning; as, I can't see any logic in his
      argument; also, sound judgment; as, the logic of surrender
      was uncontestable.
      [PJC]

   4. The path of reasoning used in any specific argument; as,
      his logic was irrefutable.
      [PJC]

   5. (Electronics, Computers) A function of an electrical
      circuit (called a gate) that mimics certain elementary
      binary logical operations on electrical signals, such as
      AND, OR, or NOT; as, a logic circuit; the arithmetic and
      logic unit.
      [PJC]


From WordNet (r) 2.0:

logic
     n 1: the branch of philosophy that analyzes inference
     2: reasoned and reasonable judgment; "it made a certain kind of
        logic"
     3: the principles that guide reasoning within a given field or
        situation; "economic logic requires it"; "by the logic of
        war"
     4: a system of reasoning [syn: logical system, system of
        logic]


From Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0:

72 Moby Thesaurus words for "logic":
   Aristotelian logic, Boolean algebra, Ramistic logic, admissibility,
   aesthetics, algebra of classes, algebra of relations, axiology,
   casuistry, common sense, cosmology, deduction, dialectic,
   dialectics, doctrine of inference, doctrine of terms,
   epistemological logic, epistemology, ethics, experimental logic,
   first philosophy, formal logic, gnosiology, good sense,
   intelligence, judiciousness, justifiability, justness, logicality,
   logicalness, logics, logistic, material logic, mathematical logic,
   mental philosophy, metaphysics, moral philosophy, ontology,
   phenomenology, philosophastry, philosophic doctrine,
   philosophic system, philosophic theory, philosophical inquiry,
   philosophical speculation, philosophy, plausibility, practicality,
   presence of mind, propositional calculus, psychological logic,
   psychologism, ratiocination, rationality, reason, reasonability,
   reasonableness, reasoning, school of philosophy, school of thought,
   science of being, sense, sensibleness, set theory, sophistry,
   sound sense, soundness, sweet reason, theory of beauty,
   theory of knowledge, value theory, wisdom




From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (27 SEP 03):

logic
     
        1. <philosophy, mathematics> A branch of philosophy and
        mathematics that deals with the formal principles, methods and
        criteria of validity of inference, reasoning and
        knowledge.
     
        Logic is concerned with what is true and how we can know
        whether something is true.  This involves the formalisation of
        logical arguments and proofs in terms of symbols
        representing propositions and logical connectives.  The
        meanings of these logical connectives are expressed by a set
        of rules which are assumed to be self-evident.
     
        Boolean algebra deals with the basic operations of truth
        values: AND, OR, NOT and combinations thereof.  Predicate
        logic extends this with existential and universal
        quantifiers and symbols standing for predicates which may
        depend on variables.  The rules of natural deduction
        describe how we may proceed from valid premises to valid
        conclusions, where the premises and conclusions are
        expressions in predicate logic.
     
        Symbolic logic uses a meta-language concerned with truth,
        which may or may not have a corresponding expression in the
        world of objects called existance.  In symbolic logic,
        arguments and proofs are made in terms of symbols
        representing propositions and logical connectives.  The
        meanings of these begin with a set of rules or primitives
        which are assumed to be self-evident.  Fortunately, even from
        vague primitives, functions can be defined with precise
        meaning.
     
        Boolean logic deals with the basic operations of truth
        values: AND, OR, NOT and combinations thereof.  Predicate
        logic extends this with existential quantifiers and
        universal quantifiers which introduce bound variables
        ranging over finite sets; the predicate itself takes on
        only the values true and false.  Deduction describes how we
        may proceed from valid premises to valid conclusions, where
        these are expressions in predicate logic.
     
        Carnap used the phrase "rational reconstruction" to describe
        the logical analysis of thought.  Thus logic is less concerned
        with how thought does proceed, which is considered the realm
        of psychology, and more with how it should proceed to discover
        truth.  It is the touchstone of the results of thinking, but
        neither its regulator nor a motive for its practice.
     
        See also fuzzy logic, logic programming, arithmetic and logic unit,
        first-order logic,
     
        See also Boolean logic, fuzzy logic, logic programming,
        first-order logic, logic bomb, combinatory logic,
        higher-order logic, intuitionistic logic, equational
        logic, modal logic, linear logic, paradox.
     
        2. <electronics> Boolean logic circuits.
     
        See also arithmetic and logic unit, asynchronous logic,
        TTL.
     
        (1995-03-17)
     
     


From THE DEVIL'S DICTIONARY ((C)1911 Released April 15 1993):

LOGIC, n.  The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with
the limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding.  The
basic of logic is the syllogism, consisting of a major and a minor
premise and a conclusion -- thus:
    _Major Premise_:  Sixty men can do a piece of work sixty times as
quickly as one man.
    _Minor Premise_:  One man can dig a posthole in sixty seconds;
therefore --
    _Conclusion_:  Sixty men can dig a posthole in one second.
    This may be called the syllogism arithmetical, in which, by
combining logic and mathematics, we obtain a double certainty and are
twice blessed.





 
 Encyclopedia Opens New Window.

For other uses, see Logic (disambiguation).
Philosophy

Portal   v  d  e 

Logic, from the Greek λογικός (logikos)[1] is the study of reasoning.[2] Logic is used in most intellectual activity, but is studied primarily in the disciplines of philosophy, mathematics, and computer science. Logic examines general forms which arguments may take, which forms are valid, and which are fallacies. It is one kind of critical thinking. In philosophy, the study of logic falls in the area of epistemology, which asks: "How do we know what we know?" In mathematics, it is the study of valid inferences within some formal language.[3]

As a discipline, logic dates back to Aristotle, who established its fundamental place in philosophy. The study of logic is part of the classical trivium.

Averroes defined logic as "the tool for distinguishing between the true and the false"[4]; Richard Whately, '"the Science, as well as the Art, of reasoning"; and Frege, "the science of the most general laws of truth". The article Definitions of logic provides citations for these and other definitions.

Logic is often divided into two parts, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. The first is drawing general conclusions from specific examples, the second drawing logical conclusions from definitions and axioms. A similar dichotomy, used by Aristotle, is analysis and synthesis. Here the first takes an object of study and examines its component parts, the second considers how parts can be combined to form a whole.

Logic is also studied in argumentation theory.[5]

Contents

[edit] Nature of logic

The concept of logical form is central to logic, it being held that the validity of an argument is determined by its logical form, not by its content. Traditional Aristotelian syllogistic logic and modern symbolic logic are examples of formal logics.

  • Informal logic is the study of natural language arguments. The study of fallacies is an especially important branch of informal logic. The dialogues of Plato[6] are good examples of informal logic.
  • Formal logic is the study of inference with purely formal content. An inference possesses a purely formal content if it can be expressed as a particular application of a wholly abstract rule, that is, a rule that is not about any particular thing or property. The works of Aristotle contain the earliest known formal study of logic. Modern formal logic follows and expands on Aristotle.[7] In many definitions of logic, logical inference and inference with purely formal content are the same. This does not render the notion of informal logic vacuous, because no formal logic captures all of the nuance of natural language.
  • Symbolic logic is the study of symbolic abstractions that capture the formal features of logical inference.[8][9] Symbolic logic is often divided into two branches, propositional logic and predicate logic.
  • Mathematical logic is an extension of symbolic logic into other areas, in particular to the study of model theory, proof theory, set theory, and recursion theory.

[edit] Logical form

Logic is generally accepted to be formal, in that it aims to analyse and represent the form (or logical form) of any valid argument type. The form of an argument is displayed by representing its sentences in the formal grammar and symbolism of a logical language to make its content usable in formal inference. If one considers the notion of form to be too philosophically loaded, one could say that formalizing is nothing else than translating English sentences in the language of logic.

This is known as showing the logical form of the argument. It is necessary because indicative sentences of ordinary language show a considerable variety of form and complexity that makes their use in inference impractical. It requires, first, ignoring those grammatical features which are irrelevant to logic (such as gender and declension if the argument is in Latin), replacing conjunctions which are not relevant to logic (such as 'but') with logical conjunctions like 'and' and replacing ambiguous or alternative logical expressions ('any', 'every', etc.) with expressions of a standard type (such as 'all', or the universal quantifier ∀).

Second, certain parts of the sentence must be replaced with schematic letters. Thus, for example, the expression 'all As are Bs' shows the logical form which is common to the sentences 'all men are mortals', 'all cats are carnivores', 'all Greeks are philosophers' and so on.

That the concept of form is fundamental to logic was already recognized in ancient times. Aristotle uses variable letters to represent valid inferences in Prior Analytics, leading Jan Łukasiewicz to say that the introduction of variables was 'one of Aristotle's greatest inventions'.[10] According to the followers of Aristotle (such as Ammonius), only the logical principles stated in schematic terms belong to logic, and not those given in concrete terms. The concrete terms 'man', 'mortal', etc., are analogous to the substitution values of the schematic placeholders 'A', 'B', 'C', which were called the 'matter' (Greek 'hyle') of the inference.

The fundamental difference between modern formal logic and traditional or Aristotelian logic lies in their differing analysis of the logical form of the sentences they treat.

  • In the traditional view, the form of the sentence consists of (1) a subject (e.g. 'man') plus a sign of quantity ('all' or 'some' or 'no'); (2) the copula which is of the form 'is' or 'is not'; (3) a predicate (e.g. 'mortal'). Thus: all men are mortal. The logical constants such as 'all', 'no' and so on, plus sentential connectives such as 'and' and 'or' were called 'syncategorematic' terms (from the Greek 'kategorei' – to predicate, and 'syn' – together with). This is a fixed scheme, where each judgement has an identified quantity and copula, determining the logical form of the sentence.
  • According to the modern view, the fundamental form of a simple sentence is given by a recursive schema, involving logical connectives, such as a quantifier with its bound variable, which are joined to by juxtaposition to other sentences, which in turn may have logical structure.
  • The modern view is more complex, since a single judgement of Aristotle's system will involve two or more logical connectives. For example, the sentence "All men are mortal" involves in term logic two non-logical terms "is a man" (here M) and "is mortal" (here D): the sentence is given by the judgement A(M,D). In predicate logic the sentence involves the same two non-logical concepts, here analysed as m(x) and d(x), and the sentence is given by \forall x. (m(x) \rightarrow d(x)), involving the logical connectives for universal quantification and implication.
  • But equally, the modern view is more powerful: medieval logicians recognised the problem of multiple generality, where Aristotelean logic is unable to satisfactorily render such sentences as "Some guys have all the luck", because both quantities "all" and "some" may be relevant in an inference, but the fixed scheme that Aristotle used allows only one to govern the inference. Just as linguists recognise recursive structure in natural languages, it appears that logic needs recursive structure.

[edit] Deductive and inductive reasoning

Deductive reasoning concerns what follows necessarily from given premises (if a, then b). However, inductive reasoning—the process of deriving a reliable generalization from observations—has sometimes been included in the study of logic. Correspondingly, we must distinguish between deductive validity and inductive validity (called "cogency"). An inference is deductively valid if and only if there is no possible situation in which all the premises are true and the conclusion false. An inductive argument can be neither valid nor invalid; its premises give only some degree of probability, but not certainty, to its conclusion.

The notion of deductive validity can be rigorously stated for systems of formal logic in terms of the well-understood notions of semantics. Inductive validity on the other hand requires us to define a reliable generalization of some set of observations. The task of providing this definition may be approached in various ways, some less formal than others; some of these definitions may use mathematical models of probability. For the most part this discussion of logic deals only with deductive logic.

[edit] Consistency, validity, soundness, and completeness

Among the important properties that logical systems can have:

  • Consistency, which means that no theorem of the system contradicts another.[11]
  • Validity, which means that the system's rules of proof will never allow a false inference from true premises.[11]
  • Soundness, which means that the system's rules of proof will never allow a false inference from true premises, and the premises prove true. Soundness results from both validity and true premises. If a system is sound and its axioms are true then its theorems are also guaranteed to be true.[11]
  • Completeness, which means that if a theorem is true, it can be proven.

Some logical systems do not have all three properties. As an example, Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorems show that no standard formal system of arithmetic can be consistent and complete.[9] At the same time his theorems for first-order predicate logics not extended by specific axioms to be arithmetic formal systems with equality, show those to be complete and consistent.[12]

[edit] Rival conceptions of logic

Logic arose (see below) from a concern with correctness of argumentation. Modern logicians usually wish to ensure that logic studies just those arguments that arise from appropriately general forms of inference. For example, Thomas Hofweber writes in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy that logic "does not, however, cover good reasoning as a whole. That is the job of the theory of rationality. Rather it deals with inferences whose validity can be traced back to the formal features of the representations that are involved in that inference, be they linguistic, mental, or other representations".[3]

By contrast, Immanuel Kant argued that logic should be conceived as the science of judgment, an idea taken up in Gottlob Frege's logical and philosophical work, where thought (German: Gedanke) is substituted for judgment (German: Urteil). On this conception, the valid inferences of logic follow from the structural features of judgments or thoughts.

[edit] History of logic

The earliest sustained work on the subject of logic is that of Aristotle,[13] In contrast with other traditions, Aristotelian logic became widely accepted in science and mathematics, ultimately giving rise to the formally sophisticated systems of modern logic.

Several ancient civilizations have employed intricate systems of reasoning and asked questions about logic or propounded logical paradoxes. In India, the Nasadiya Sukta of the Rigveda (RV 10.129) contains ontological speculation in terms of various logical divisions that were later recast formally as the four circles of catuṣkoṭi: "A", "not A", "Neither A or not A", and "Both not A and not not A".[14] The Chinese philosopher Gongsun Long (ca. 325–250 BC) proposed the paradox "One and one cannot become two, since neither becomes two."[15] Also, the Chinese School of Names is recorded as having examined logical puzzles such as "A White Horse is not a Horse" as early as the fifth century BCE.[16] In China, the tradition of scholarly investigation into logic, however, was repressed by the Qin dynasty following the legalist philosophy of Han Feizi.

Logic in Islamic philosophy also contributed to the development of modern logic, which included the development of "Avicennian logic"[17] as an alternative to Aristotelian logic. Avicenna's system of logic was responsible for the introduction of hypothetical syllogism,[18] temporal modal logic,[19][20] and inductive logic.[21][22] The rise of the Asharite school, however, limited original work on logic in Islamic philosophy, though it did continue into the 15th century and had a significant influence on European logic during the Renaissance.

In India, innovations in the scholastic school, called Nyaya, continued from ancient times into the early 18th century, though it did not survive long into the colonial period. In the 20th century, Western philosophers like Stanislaw Schayer and Klaus Glashoff have tried to explore certain aspects of the Indian tradition of logic.

During the later medieval period, major efforts were made to show that Aristotle's ideas were compatible with Christian faith. During the later period of the Middle Ages, logic became a main focus of philosophers, who would engage in critical logical analyses of philosophical arguments.

The syllogistic logic developed by Aristotle predominated until the mid-nineteenth century when interest in the foundations of mathematics stimulated the development of symbolic logic (now called mathematical logic). In 1854, George Boole published An Investigation of the Laws of Thought on Which are Founded the Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities, introducing symbolic logic and the principles of what is now known as Boolean logic. In 1879 Frege published Begriffsschrift which inaugurated modern logic with the invention of quantifier notation. From 1910-13 Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell published Principia Mathematica[8] on the foundations of mathematics, attempting to derive mathematical truths from axioms and inference rules in symbolic logic. In 1931 Gödel raised serious problems with the foundationalist program and logic ceased to focus on such issues.

The development of logic since Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein had a profound influence on the practice of philosophy and the perceived nature of philosophical problems (see Analytic philosophy), and Philosophy of mathematics. Logic, especially sentential logic, is implemented in computer logic circuits and is fundamental to computer science. Logic is commonly taught by university philosophy departments often as a compulsory discipline.

[edit] Topics in logic

[edit] Syllogistic logic

The Organon was Aristotle's body of work on logic, with the Prior Analytics constituting the first explicit work in formal logic, introducing the syllogistic. The parts of syllogistic logic, also known by the name term logic, were the analysis of the judgements into propositions consisting of two terms that are related by one of a fixed number of relations, and the expression of inferences by means of syllogisms that consisted of two propositions sharing a common term as premise, and a conclusion which was a proposition involving the two unrelated terms from the premises.

Aristotle's work was regarded in classical times and from medieval times in Europe and the Middle East as the very picture of a fully worked out system. It was not alone: the Stoics proposed a system of propositional logic that was studied by medieval logicians; nor was the perfection of Aristotle's system undisputed; for example the problem of multiple generality was recognised in medieval times. Nonetheless, problems with syllogistic logic were not seen as being in need of revolutionary solutions.

Today, some academics claim that Aristotle's system is generally seen as having little more than historical value (though there is some current interest in extending term logics), regarded as made obsolete by the advent of propositional logic and the predicate calculus. Others use Aristotle in argumentation theory to help develop and critically question argumentation schemes that are used in artificial intelligence and legal arguments.

[edit] Sentential (propositional) logic

A propositional calculus or logic (also a sentential calculus) is a formal system in which formulae representing propositions can be formed by combining atomic propositions using logical connectives, and a system of formal proof rules allows certain formulæ to be established as "theorems".

[edit] Predicate logic

Predicate logic is the generic term for symbolic formal systems such as first-order logic, second-order logic, many-sorted logic, and infinitary logic.

Predicate logic provides an account of quantifiers general enough to express a wide set of arguments occurring in natural language. Aristotelian syllogistic logic specifies a small number of forms that the relevant part of the involved judgements may take. Predicate logic allows sentences to be analysed into subject and argument in several additional ways, thus allowing predicate logic to solve the problem of multiple generality that had perplexed medieval logicians.

The development of predicate logic is usually attributed to Gottlob Frege, who is also credited as one of the founders of analytical philosophy, but the formulation of predicate logic most often used today is the first-order logic presented in Principles of Mathematical Logic by David Hilbert and Wilhelm Ackermann in 1928. The analytical generality of predicate logic allowed the formalisation of mathematics, drove the investigation of set theory, and allowed the development of Alfred Tarski's approach to model theory. It provides the foundation of modern mathematical logic.

Frege's original system of predicate logic was second-order, rather than first-order. Second-order logic is most prominently defended (against the criticism of Willard Van Orman Quine and others) by George Boolos and Stewart Shapiro.

[edit] Modal logic

In languages, modality deals with the phenomenon that sub-parts of a sentence may have their semantics modified by special verbs or modal particles. For example, "We go to the games" can be modified to give "We should go to the games", and "We can go to the games"" and perhaps "We will go to the games". More abstractly, we might say that modality affects the circumstances in which we take an assertion to be satisfied.

The logical study of modality dates back to Aristotle, who was concerned with the alethic modalities of necessity and possibility, which he observed to be dual in the sense of De Morgan duality.[citation needed] While the study of necessity and possibility remained important to philosophers, little logical innovation happened until the landmark investigations of Clarence Irving Lewis in 1918, who formulated a family of rival axiomatizations of the alethic modalities. His work unleashed a torrent of new work on the topic, expanding the kinds of modality treated to include deontic logic and epistemic logic. The seminal work of Arthur Prior applied the same formal language to treat temporal logic and paved the way for the marriage of the two subjects. Saul Kripke discovered (contemporaneously with rivals) his theory of frame semantics which revolutionised the formal technology available to modal logicians and gave a new graph-theoretic way of looking at modality that has driven many applications in computational linguistics and computer science, such as dynamic logic.

[edit] Informal reasoning

The motivation for the study of logic in ancient times was clear: it is so that one may learn to distinguish good from bad arguments, and so become more effective in argument and oratory, and perhaps also to become a better person. Half of the works of Aristotle's Organon treat inference as it occurs in an informal setting, side by side with the development of the syllogistic, and in the Aristotelian school, these informal works on logic were seen as complementary to Aristotle's treatment of rhetoric.

This ancient motivation is still alive, although it no longer takes centre stage in the picture of logic; typically dialectical logic will form the heart of a course in critical thinking, a compulsory course at many universities.

Argumentation theory is the study and research of informal logic, fallacies, and critical questions as they relate to every day and practical situations. Specific types of dialogue can be analyzed and questioned to reveal premises, conclusions, and fallacies. Argumentation theory is now applied in artificial intelligence and law.

[edit] Mathematical logic

Mathematical logic really refers to two distinct areas of research: the first is the application of the techniques of formal logic to mathematics and mathematical reasoning, and the second, in the other direction, the application of mathematical techniques to the representation and analysis of formal logic.[23]

The earliest use of mathematics and geometry in relation to logic and philosophy goes back to the ancient Greeks such as Euclid, Plato, and Aristotle.[24] Many other ancient and medieval philosophers applied mathematical ideas and methods to their philosophical claims.[25]

One of the boldest attempts to apply logic to mathematics was undoubtedly the logicism pioneered by philosopher-logicians such as Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell: the idea was that mathematical theories were logical tautologies, and the programme was to show this by means to a reduction of mathematics to logic.[8] The various attempts to carry this out met with a series of failures, from the crippling of Frege's project in his Grundgesetze by Russell's paradox, to the defeat of Hilbert's program by Gödel's incompleteness theorems.

Both the statement of Hilbert's program and its refutation by Gödel depended upon their work establishing the second area of mathematical logic, the application of mathematics to logic in the form of proof theory.[26] Despite the negative nature of the incompleteness theorems, Gödel's completeness theorem, a result in model theory and another application of mathematics to logic, can be understood as showing how close logicism came to being true: every rigorously defined mathematical theory can be exactly captured by a first-order logical theory; Frege's proof calculus is enough to describe the whole of mathematics, though not equivalent to it. Thus we see how complementary the two areas of mathematical logic have been.[citation needed]

If proof theory and model theory have been the foundation of mathematical logic, they have been but two of the four pillars of the subject. Set theory originated in the study of the infinite by Georg Cantor, and it has been the source of many of the most challenging and important issues in mathematical logic, from Cantor's theorem, through the status of the Axiom of Choice and the question of the independence of the continuum hypothesis, to the modern debate on large cardinal axioms.

Recursion theory captures the idea of computation in logical and arithmetic terms; its most classical achievements are the undecidability of the Entscheidungsproblem by Alan Turing, and his presentation of the Church-Turing thesis.[27] Today recursion theory is mostly concerned with the more refined problem of complexity classes — when is a problem efficiently solvable? — and the classification of degrees of unsolvability.[28]

[edit] Philosophical logic

Philosophical logic deals with formal descriptions of natural language. Most philosophers assume that the bulk of "normal" proper reasoning can be captured by logic, if one can find the right method for translating ordinary language into that logic. Philosophical logic is essentially a continuation of the traditional discipline that was called "Logic" before the invention of mathematical logic. Philosophical logic has a much greater concern with the connection between natural language and logic. As a result, philosophical logicians have contributed a great deal to the development of non-standard logics (e.g., free logics, tense logics) as well as various extensions of classical logic (e.g., modal logics), and non-standard semantics for such logics (e.g., Kripke's technique of supervaluations in the semantics of logic).

Logic and the philosophy of language are closely related. Philosophy of language has to do with the study of how our language engages and interacts with our thinking. Logic has an immediate impact on other areas of study. Studying logic and the relationship between logic and ordinary speech can help a person better structure their own arguments and critique the arguments of others. Many popular arguments are filled with errors because so many people are untrained in logic and unaware of how to correctly formulate an argument.

[edit] Logic and computation

Logic cut to the heart of computer science as it emerged as a discipline: Alan Turing's work on the Entscheidungsproblem followed from Kurt Gödel's work on the incompleteness theorems, and the notion of general purpose computers that came from this work was of fundamental importance to the designers of the computer machinery in the 1940s.

In the 1950s and 1960s, researchers predicted that when human knowledge could be expressed using logic with mathematical notation, it would be possible to create a machine that reasons, or artificial intelligence. This turned out to be more difficult than expected because of the complexity of human reasoning. In logic programming, a program consists of a set of axioms and rules. Logic programming systems such as Prolog compute the consequences of the axioms and rules in order to answer a query.

Today, logic is extensively applied in the fields of artificial intelligence, and computer science, and these fields provide a rich source of problems in formal and informal logic. Argumentation theory is one good example of how logic is being applied to artificial intelligence. The ACM Computing Classification System in particular regards:

Furthermore, computers can be used as tools for logicians. For example, in symbolic logic and mathematical logic, proofs by humans can be computer-assisted. Using automated theorem proving the machines can find and check proofs, as well as work with proofs too lengthy to be written out by hand.

[edit] Controversies in logic

Just as we have seen there is disagreement over what logic is about, so there is disagreement about what logical truths there are.

[edit] Bivalence and the law of the excluded middle

The logics discussed above are all "bivalent" or "two-valued"; that is, they are most naturally understood as dividing propositions into true and false propositions. Non-classical logics are those systems which reject bivalence.

Hegel developed his own dialectic logic that extended Kant's transcendental logic but also brought it back to ground by assuring us that "neither in heaven nor in earth, neither in the world of mind nor of nature, is there anywhere such an abstract 'either–or' as the understanding maintains. Whatever exists is concrete, with difference and opposition in itself".[29]

In 1910 Nicolai A. Vasiliev rejected the law of excluded middle and the law of contradiction and proposed the law of excluded fourth and logic tolerant to contradiction.[citation needed] In the early 20th century Jan Łukasiewicz investigated the extension of the traditional true/false values to include a third value, "possible", so inventing ternary logic, the first multi-valued logic.[citation needed]

Logics such as fuzzy logic have since been devised with an infinite number of "degrees of truth", represented by a real number between 0 and 1.[30]

Intuitionistic logic was proposed by L.E.J. Brouwer as the correct logic for reasoning about mathematics, based upon his rejection of the law of the excluded middle as part of his intuitionism. Brouwer rejected formalisation in mathematics, but his student Arend Heyting studied intuitionistic logic formally, as did Gerhard Gentzen. Intuitionistic logic has come to be of great interest to computer scientists, as it is a constructive logic, and is hence a logic of what computers can do.

Modal logic is not truth conditional, and so it has often been proposed as a non-classical logic. However, modal logic is normally formalised with the principle of the excluded middle, and its relational semantics is bivalent, so this inclusion is disputable.

[edit] Is logic empirical?

What is the epistemological status of the laws of logic? What sort of argument is appropriate for criticizing purported principles of logic? In an influential paper entitled "Is logic empirical?"[31] Hilary Putnam, building on a suggestion of W.V. Quine, argued that in general the facts of propositional logic have a similar epistemological status as facts about the physical universe, for example as the laws of mechanics or of general relativity, and in particular that what physicists have learned about quantum mechanics provides a compelling case for abandoning certain familiar principles of classical logic: if we want to be realists about the physical phenomena described by quantum theory, then we should abandon the principle of distributivity, substituting for classical logic the quantum logic proposed by Garrett Birkhoff and John von Neumann.[32]

Another paper by the same name by Sir Michael Dummett argues that Putnam's desire for realism mandates the law of distributivity.[33] Distributivity of logic is essential for the realist's understanding of how propositions are true of the world in just the same way as he has argued the principle of bivalence is. In this way, the question, "Is logic empirical?" can be seen to lead naturally into the fundamental controversy in metaphysics on realism versus anti-realism.

[edit] Implication: strict or material?

It is obvious that the notion of implication formalised in classical logic does not comfortably translate into natural language by means of "if… then…", due to a number of problems called the paradoxes of material implication.

The first class of paradoxes involves counterfactuals, such as "If the moon is made of green cheese, then 2+2=5", which are puzzling because natural language does not support the principle of explosion. Eliminating this class of paradoxes was the reason for C. I. Lewis's formulation of strict implication, which eventually led to more radically revisionist logics such as relevance logic.

The second class of paradoxes involves redundant premises, falsely suggesting that we know the succedent because of the antecedent: thus "if that man gets elected, granny will die" is materially true if granny happens to be in the last stages of a terminal illness, regardless of the man's election prospects. Such sentences violate the Gricean maxim of relevance, and can be modelled by logics that reject the principle of monotonicity of entailment, such as relevance logic.

[edit] Tolerating the impossible

Hegel was deeply critical of any simplified notion of the Law of Non-Contradiction. It was based on Leibniz's idea that this law of logic also requires a sufficient ground in order to specify from what point of view (or time) one says that something cannot contradict itself, a building for example both moves and does not move, the ground for the first is our solar system for the second the earth. In Hegelian dialectic the law of non-contradiction, of identity, itself relies upon difference and so is not independently assertable.

Closely related to questions arising from the paradoxes of implication comes the suggestion that logic ought to tolerate inconsistency. Relevance logic and paraconsistent logic are the most important approaches here, though the concerns are different: a key consequence of classical logic and some of its rivals, such as intuitionistic logic, is that they respect the principle of explosion, which means that the logic collapses if it is capable of deriving a contradiction. Graham Priest, the main proponent of dialetheism, has argued for paraconsistency on the grounds that there are in fact, true contradictions.[34]

[edit] Rejection of logical truth

The philosophical vein of various kinds of skepticism contains many kinds of doubt and rejection of the various bases upon which logic rests, such as the idea of logical form, correct inference, or meaning, typically leading to the conclusion that there are no logical truths. Observe that this is opposite to the usual views in philosophical skepticism, where logic directs skeptical enquiry to doubt received wisdoms, as in the work of Sextus Empiricus.

Friedrich Nietzsche provides a strong example of the rejection of the usual basis of logic: his radical rejection of idealisation led him to reject truth as a mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and anthropomorphisms—in short ... metaphors which are worn out and without sensuous power; coins which have lost their pictures and now matter only as metal, no longer as coins[35]. His rejection of truth did not lead him to reject the idea of either inference or logic completely, but rather suggested that logic [came] into existence in man's head [out] of illogic, whose realm originally must have been immense. Innumerable beings who made inferences in a way different from ours perished[36]. Thus there is the idea that logical inference has a use as a tool for human survival, but that its existence does not support the existence of truth, nor does it have a reality beyond the instrumental: Logic, too, also rests on assumptions that do not correspond to anything in the real world[37].

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ "possessed of reason, intellectual, dialectical, argumentative", also related to λόγος (logos), "word, thought, idea, argument, account, reason, or principle" (Liddell & Scott 1999; Online Etymology Dictionary 2001).
  2. ^ Welton, James (1896). A manual of logic. University tutorial series. 1 (2nd ed.). W.B. Clive. http://books.google.com/books?id=KaAZAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=%22art+and+science+of+reasoning%22. 
  3. ^ a b Hofweber, T. (2004). "Logic and Ontology". in Zalta, Edward N. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-ontology. 
  4. ^ Averroes, In Arist. Physicam I, textus 35, ed. Juntina, IV, fol. 11vb.
  5. ^ Cox, J. Robert; Willard, Charles Arthur, eds (1983). Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research. Southern Illinois University Press. ISBN 978-0809310500. 
  6. ^ Plato (1976). Buchanan, Scott. ed. The Portable Plato. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-015040-4. 
  7. ^ Aristotle (2001). "Posterior Analytics". in Mckeon, Richard. The Basic Works. Modern Library. ISBN 0-375-75799-6. 
  8. ^ a b c Whitehead, Alfred North; Russell, Bertrand (1967). Principia Mathematica to *56. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-62606-4. 
  9. ^ a b For a more modern treatment, see Hamilton, A. G. (1980). Logic for Mathematicians. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-29291-3. 
  10. ^ Łukasiewicz, Jan (1957). Aristotle's syllogistic from the standpoint of modern formal logic (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0198241447. 
  11. ^ a b c Bergmann, Merrie, James Moor, and Jack Nelson. The Logic Book fifth edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2009.
  12. ^ Mendelson, Elliott (1964). "Quantification Theory: Completeness Theorems". Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Van Nostrand. ISBN 0412808307. 
  13. ^ E.g., Kline (1972, p.53) wrote "A major achievement of Aristotle was the founding of the science of logic".
  14. ^ Kak, S. (2004). The Architecture of Knowledge. Delhi: CSC. 
  15. ^ The four Catuṣkoṭi logical divisions are formally very close to the four opposed propositions of the Greek tetralemma, which in turn are analogous to the four truth values of modern relevance logic Cf. Belnap (1977); Jayatilleke, K. N., (1967, The logic of four alternatives, in Philosophy East and West, University of Hawaii Press).
  16. ^ "School of Names". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/school-names/. Retrieved 5 September 2008. 
  17. ^ Goodman, Lenn Evan (1992). Avicenna. Routledge. p. 184. ISBN 978-0415019293. 
  18. ^ Goodman, Lenn Evan (2003). Islamic Humanism. Oxford University Press. p. 155. ISBN 0195135806. 
  19. ^ "History of logic: Arabic logic". Encyclopædia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/346217/history-of-logic/65928/Arabic-logic. 
  20. ^ Nabavi, Lotfollah. "Sohrevardi's Theory of Decisive Necessity and kripke's QSS System". Journal of Faculty of Literature and Human Sciences. Archived from the original on 26 January 2008. http://web.archive.org/web/20080126100838/http://public.ut.ac.ir/html/fac/lit/articles.html. 
  21. ^ "Science and Muslim Scientists". Islam Herald. Archived from the original on 17 December 2007. http://web.archive.org/web/20071217150016/http://www.islamherald.com/asp/explore/science/science_muslim_scientists.asp. 
  22. ^ Hallaq, Wael B. (1993). Ibn Taymiyya Against the Greek Logicians. Oxford University Press. p. 48. ISBN 0198240430. 
  23. ^ Stolyar, Abram A. (1983). Introduction to Elementary Mathematical Logic. Dover Publications. p. 3. ISBN 0-486-64561-4. 
  24. ^ Barnes, Jonathan (1995). The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle. Cambridge University Press. p. 27. ISBN 0-521-42294-9. 
  25. ^ Aristotle (1989). Prior Analytics. Hackett Publishing Co.. p. 115. ISBN 978-0872200647. 
  26. ^ Mendelson, Elliott (1964). "Formal Number Theory: Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem". Introduction to Mathematical Logic. Monterey, Calif.: Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole Advanced Books & Software. OCLC 13580200. 
  27. ^ Brookshear, J. Glenn (1989). "Computability: Foundations of Recursive Function Theory". Theory of computation: formal languages, automata, and complexity. Redwood City, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings Pub. Co.. ISBN 0805301437. 
  28. ^ Brookshear, J. Glenn (1989). "Complexity". Theory of computation: formal languages, automata, and complexity. Redwood City, Calif.: Benjamin/Cummings Pub. Co.. ISBN 0805301437. 
  29. ^ Hegel, G. W. F (1971) [1817]. Philosophy of Mind. Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences. trans. William Wallace. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 174. ISBN 0198750145. 
  30. ^ Hájek, Petr (2006). "Fuzzy Logic". in Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-fuzzy/. 
  31. ^ Putnam, H. (1969). "Is Logic Empirical?". Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5. 
  32. ^ Birkhoff, G.; von Neumann, J. (1936). "The Logic of Quantum Mechanics". Annals of Mathematics 37: 823–843. 
  33. ^ Dummett, M. (1978). "Is Logic Empirical?". Truth and Other Enigmas. ISBN 0-674-91076-1. 
  34. ^ Priest, Graham (2008). "Dialetheism". in Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dialetheism. 
  35. ^ Nietzsche, 1873, On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense.
  36. ^ Nietzsche, 1882, The Gay Science.
  37. ^ Nietzsche, 1878, Human, All Too Human

[edit] References

[edit] External links and further reading

Find more about Logic on Wikipedia's sister projects:

Search Wiktionary Definitions from Wiktionary
Search Wikibooks Textbooks from Wikibooks
Search Wikiquote Quotations from Wikiquote
Search Wikisource Source texts from Wikisource
Search Commons Images and media from Commons
Search Wikinews News stories from Wikinews
Search Wikiversity Learning resources from Wikiversity


All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Privacy policy - About Wikipedia - Disclaimers - Fundraising
 
 Images Opens New Window.
File Size: 116k
Dimensions: 512 x 768 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 115.599609375k
Dimensions: 709 x 674 pixels
File Format: gif
File Size: 24.099609375k
Dimensions: 507 x 354 pixels
File Format: gif
File Size: 19.099609375k
Dimensions: 183 x 374 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 196.7998046875k
Dimensions: 1170 x 826 pixels
File Format: png
File Size: 70.19921875k
Dimensions: 360 x 640 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 80.3994140625k
Dimensions: 600 x 600 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 16.2998046875k
Dimensions: 360 x 480 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 50.19921875k
Dimensions: 286 x 526 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 30.69921875k
Dimensions: 426 x 640 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 98.099609375k
Dimensions: 600 x 385 pixels
File Format: jpeg
File Size: 119.5k
Dimensions: 640 x 640 pixels
File Format: jpeg
 
 MORE IMAGES »  
Go to » Web - QA - Dictionary - Encyclopedia - Images