• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of logic

JetLeg

Master Poster
J
Joined
Aug 29, 2007
Messages
2,414
Can you prove the rules of logic somehow?

If there is no proof for logic, how can one be so sure in it?
 
is there a popcorn emoticon up in this bitch?

I apologize for not understanding the idiom used above. Sorry about that.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are aware that the entire concept of a proof is a property of logic, right? That pretty much makes "proving logic" a moot question.
 
Ichneumonwasp said:
Think Godel. He has the answers you are seeking.
Click to expand...


I don't think so.

Godel was about the impossibility of a system of logic that is inclusive of all truth.
Jetlag is asking about the actual rules of logic, or how you get from premises to conclusions.
Not that I understand why he asks such a question.

BJ
 
Proof of logic....well, here's my take on it:

In the end, logic and math are pseudosciences. Very good ones, but still pseudosciences, because they base all of their claims on intuition. Now, they don't have to. They could (and probably will in future) derive the rules, etc. from human psychology or some similar source. Math and logic are needed to do this, however, so for now we have to stick with intuitive rules (which happen to be quite good and quite complex).
 
In the end, logic and math are pseudosciences. Very good ones, but still pseudosciences, because they base all of their claims on intuition. Now, they don't have to. They could (and probably will in future) derive the rules, etc. from human psychology or some similar source. Math and logic are needed to do this, however, so for now we have to stick with intuitive rules (which happen to be quite good and quite complex).
Click to expand...

Intuition is a useful lie - the claims are already not based on it.
 
BillyJoe said:
I don't think so.

Godel was about the impossibility of a system of logic that is inclusive of all truth.
Jetlag is asking about the actual rules of logic, or how you get from premises to conclusions.
Not that I understand why he asks such a question.

BJ
Click to expand...


One of Goedel's major accomplishments was proving the completeness of the first-order predicate calculus.

After that, Goedel proved the incompleteness of the second-order predicate calculus (and other logical calculi of similar or greater power).

Certain aspects of the machinery of deduction and proof have been included (or excluded) rather arbitrarily.

I recommend reading Mathematics - The Loss of Certainty by Morris Kline. It is quite accessible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom