Logic, 1 in a series

From "The Logic Book" by Bergmann, Moor and Nelson.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Formal
• logic
• deduction
• symbolic
• sentential
• syntax
• metatheory
• cropper
• lyceum

[justme3073]

Is tis from a beginner book? If so I feel reallllly stupid... Anyway is there a website on this stuff? I searched logic but I come up with a bunch of things that don't look like this.

[MrCropper]

I don't know about any websites for it. This book isn't really advanced... um, it was my first logic book ever, so I guess it worked for me as a beginner. Yeah, its kind of a beginner's book.

[FoxHatesMe]

Ohhhh, darn. 0.o Maybe I should listen to it some more times or something, I do like math. ^__^ Justme os me btw, I got banned because Fox hates me.

[MrCropper]

welcome back!

[TheGreatestGreatApe]

I got a book from the library that uses something called a star test for syllogistic logic invented by the author Harry J. Gensler. I'm not sure if you know this author. The star test is explained online. Thought you may be interested in it.

[MrCropper]

Tell me more.

[hijadeldragon]

You don't have idea how much this is helping me! I typed "formal logic" in youtube out of frustration with my other intents to approach logic and I found this and now I'm watching it and taking notes and I can't be happier. Really, thank you very much from a psichologyst that decided to do her master on Philosophy of languge and has been having a very hard time starting. :)

[McTaggStar]

@lazmedina shut up. he goes on to in-depth explanations in later videos. its an introductory video don't be so knit picky you fuck.

[gpokriff2]

I own this book, bought for a sentential logic course, it's my least favorite of all logic books. Glad to find some logic on youtube, however.

[rh001YT]

When considering the "Either/OR" situation, one must remember that testing had to be done to detemine the EITHER, and that an OR mechanism is known to be in place after the EITHER. If the next test does not find X (on a branch of the OR), then by the working of the mechanism X is on/in the other branch. What I am saying is that the mechanism must be in place or this logic can't be followed. Language usage can blur the fact that we are talking about mechanisms.

[CircleBastiat]

It says in your profile that one of your interests is pedagogy. Well sir, you are one fine pedagogue.

[wrdeboise]

These basic forms are generally known as the 'Rules of Inference'. There are also forms known as tautologies; one that comes to mind is: p or not-p. This statement is considered true in [a]ll possible worlds.

[wrdeboise]

Yes, I actually had a programming class in which the professor needed to explain a concept by writing out a basic truth table that showed examples of the various ways one might use an if-then tree. Computers often use, what are known as, Boolean (true false) values to execute blocks of code. It does get a little hairy when you need the computer to give a true value for a statement that evaluates to false but it's not as bad as logic class.

[wrdeboise]

I took a basic statement logic class in college. I did pretty well, up until geometric proofs section. During this part, we used logically valid forms like Modus Pones, Modus Tollens, and etc to solve some basic proofs.

[wrdeboise]

However, I found the mechanistic, algorithm used in a truth table a far easier method to deduce from then to try and figure out which form, or forms, could be used to solve a proof. But, from what I know, proofs serve as a terse way of doing things when logic formulas become ridiculously huge.

[trisky1234]

@hijadeldragon Heh.. just started my psy-bachelor and already getting thrown at with this!

[trisky1234]

Logic test coming up next week. Hell yeah!

[McTaggStar]

@jonyzion you're a fucking idiot.

[jonyzion]

Haha , he is just reading the book.

he aint no smart nerd.

[jaberwocky6669]

Continued: In practice, a hu-

man is incapable of reasoning with these logics due to mistakes. Human logic needs cross-checks and intuition. Technical logics are not logic in the traditional sense. They do not enable a human to reason correctly. Our need for human-oriented rules of reasoning has been obscured by computers, for which it is easier to make rules. Developing rules for

human reasoning can be very difficult, but it is of vital importance to humans.

[jaberwocky6669]

To quote Bruce Mills in his book Theoretical Introduction to Programming: Traditional logic is a study of rules that enable humans to reason cor-

rectly. Classically, the humanity of the reasoner was implicit. Humans were viewed as the only non-trivial reasoners. With computers, a techni-

cal constraint in the complexity of the rules in a logic system was lifted. However, technical logics are only of use on computers.

[Kyrrick]

All he's doing is reading the book.

[foxtrot77777]

That that is is that that is not is not is that it it is .

[lazmedina]

This is fine but he is reading me a book. I can read myself...explain the essence of the text-don't just read it.

[titusjewell]

I am done with your logic series, Brandon. Great work. I am pleased that you posted the series to youtube. They certainly helped me to learn the brute mechanics of doing logic trees, something I needed to learn for my graduate logic course.

I hope that you eventually go through the rest of the book. Great work.

Titus (Logic TA at Ohio University)

[CathPresbyter]

Dr. Gensler is a Jesuit who wrote the book right before he took a position teaching at the U of Scranton. It is a great book to visually understand the syllogistic system of Aristotle.