Recent Responses
Can you possibly suggest any good philosophical resources for the study of logic? Concerning validity, soundness, paraphrasing and diagramming. I am studying philosophy at Uni and am struggling alot with just the introduction of the module and need some extra help as even the text books offered seem a little complex for me.
Peter Smith
February 19, 2010
(changed February 19, 2010)
Permalink
Any university library will have dozens of elementary textbooks in its collection with titles like "Logic", "Formal Logic", "Elementary Logic", "Beginning Logic", "The Logic Book", etc. etc. The best advice is probably just to quickly browse through the opening chapter or two of a whole... Read more
Hello. This is a question for the philosophers of mathematics or the logicians. I have heard that first order logic is complete, and that second order logic is incomplete. The completeness of first order logic I have seen characterized as the fact that every true proposition (in the semantic sense) is also provable (in the syntactic sense). I've also heard that the completeness at stake in both cases is not the same, but it has never been clear to me in what they differ. Supposedly second order logic, having more expressive power, has enough resources to express arithmetic and thus the first incompleteness theorem applies to it, but that theorem says of such systems that they are incomplete. But I also have heard some people (or maybe I have misheard them) discussing such incompleteness in the same terms, that is, as saying that not every true theorem of such systems is provable, though the converse is true (they are sound). I am no logician, so I would appreciate firstly, if someone can point out any mistakes in my question, and secondly if someone could clarify the different senses of completeness. Thanks a lot.
Peter Smith
February 19, 2010
(changed February 19, 2010)
Permalink
Any good textbook that covers second-order logic should in fact clearly answer your question. Here, though, is a summary answer.
An inference in the formal language L from the set of premisses A to the conclusion C is valid if every interpretation of L (that respects the meaning of the logi... Read more
I have been reading recently about Aristotle's "4 Causes" (Material, Formal, Efficient, and Final). Examples illustrate material as having to do with actual physical material. (E.g. the material cause of a table might be wood). What is the corresponding material cause of something "virtual"? For example what is the material cause of a file on my computer? Is it the magnetic medium that the file resides upon? This doesn't seem correct as the file simply has no material. Does material cause even apply to a file?
Andrew N. Carpenter
February 15, 2010
(changed February 15, 2010)
Permalink
I'm not sure what Aristotle would say, but I note that many contemporary thinkers see nothing wrong with thinking that the matter that constitutes our brains and nervous systems is the "that out of which" our mental states are created. (If you want to know more about some of the ext... Read more
Are black and white colors, or not?
Jonathan Westphal
February 12, 2010
(changed February 12, 2010)
Permalink
This is a fairly frequent concern. The correct answer is that there is a sense of "colours" in which black and white are not colours (they are not chromatic colours) and a sense in which they are colours (they are achromatic colours). So if we count the achromatic colours (black, whit... Read more
Should I report a Consensual Amorous Relationship? I am a lab research assistant at a public state medical school, and I have discovered that the head of the lab has a Consensual Amorous Relationship with another researcher at the lab. I found out that prior to joining the medical school, they both worked together at another private academic hospital having the same type of work and personal relationship. It is my understanding that being public state employees, they have a duty to prevent the conflict of interests, and that a Consensual Amorous Relationship between the lab director and the lab researcher clearly generates conflict of interest. Their is also an internal policy in place that requires that Consensual Amorous Relationships between an employee and direct supervisor,are required to be reported. I have a serious internal conflict in how about to solve my dilemma, Should I confront my supervisor and ask them to self-report, or should I proceed to report it directly?
Oliver Leaman
February 12, 2010
(changed February 12, 2010)
Permalink
To snitch or not to snitch? It depends on whether you think the rule on reporting such relationships is worth having, and if you do whether even then it is worth disrupting their professional lives by reporting it. Saying they have a duty to report it does not really show that they have a... Read more
I recently had a discussion about racial pride. It is my belief that circumstances of birth are random and just as they should not be a source of shame, cannot be claimed as a source of pride. One has nothing to do with being born Irish, therefore how can they claim this as a source of pride? We all sneer at white supremacists for claiming a sense of pride in their race, yet people all over are doing essentially the same thing. Pride implies achievement. You did not achieve anything in being born, it's just something that happened to you. I was born in America, I didn't do anything to be born here, so I can only claim that I'm proud to be an American so far as I haven't chosen to move elsewhere. I think you all get the idea here. Everyone loves to say they're proud of their ethnicity or heritage, but is this logically correct? I would say no.
Gordon Marino
August 5, 2010
(changed August 5, 2010)
Permalink
By the same token one shouldn't be proud of say one'smother if she discovered a cure for cancer. It also depends upon what you mean by pride. A warm, postive feeling about the connection. I don't see any problem with that. I don't think our emotions follow the dictates of reason. There are al... Read more
I'm interested in starting a phenomenology study group beginning with Husserl. I would want to start with Husserl's _Logical Investigation_s Volumes 1 and 2 but I was wondering if the abridged version "The Shorter Investigations" will be more than enough to understand Husserl. I would like to be able to study other phenomenologists, but if the abridged version will not do, then reading the full volumes will take up the whole time. In short, has anyone read both the abridged and unabridged _Investigations_, and if so, what are your suggestions? Thank you.
Douglas Burnham
February 12, 2010
(changed February 12, 2010)
Permalink
I'd go with the shorter. Moran is an important and highly-respected figure in the field and knows what he is doing in selecting material for the abridgement. Also, I think it would be a shame 'only' to read the Investigations, and not approach Ideas, Cartesian Meditations or the Crisis.... Read more
How can an amazing philosopher fall for something stupid like this? http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/iconic-french-philosopher-bernard-henri-levy-falls-for-literary-hoax/19351050
Eddy Nahmias
February 11, 2010
(changed February 11, 2010)
Permalink
Well, your question suggestions a modus tollens argument:
If one is an amazing philosopher, then one could not fall for something so stupid. Since Levy did fall for it, he must not be an amazing philosopher.
That seems to be the conclusion drawn here. However, I know nothing about th... Read more
It seems obvious that a line of length 4 is longer than a line of length 2; but couldn't we just as easily say that the two lines are equally made up of an infinite number of points?
Donald Baxter
February 11, 2010
(changed February 11, 2010)
Permalink
You are right that the points in a 4 inch line segment can be put into one-to-one correspondence with the points in a 2 inch line segment. Think of a line swinging through both line segments, the way a door swings through a shorter path nearer its hinge and a longer path further from the... Read more
I have to write a persuasive essay in English class and the subject of my choice is the meaning of life. I knew ahead of time of the difficulties that will plague me in trying to properly define meaning and discuss the multiple views on the subject. My aim is to prove that a secular person can live a meaningful life. However, I want to know how I can argue for a meaningful life (more or less objectively, since it would have more grounding) without begging the question against the nihilist (who would claim that without a transcendent cause that there is no meaning at all)? It seems that to argue for a meaningful life I would have to presuppose that certain things have meaning, which they would deny. I could probably argue from analogy, and show that subjectively the fulfillment of someone's projects or the relationships we create with others have meaning to ourselves and that is enough (which I think it is) for someone to live meaningfully (or that without certain things, e.g. relationships our lives could be meaningless). But again wouldn't this be another presumption on my part that an external point such as the infamous "point of view of the universe" is the wrong one to take in measuring the meaning in our lives, and that we should take a view more closer to home. I just feel like there should be more grounding for these assumptions, and I would be really grateful if you could mention some good sources of information and try to answer my question. Thanks, I hope this counts as a question. I'm a long time reader, first time asker.
Jean Kazez
February 11, 2010
(changed February 11, 2010)
Permalink
You'd be begging the question against the nihilist, and presupposing or presuming too much, if you simply declared that there can be meaningfulness without God, but didn't argue for it. If you can find a way to argue for your view, then you haven't committed any of those sins. Of course, n... Read more