Talk:Philosophy of logic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
Someone care to try to answer some of the questions or at least write about the answers by some of the philosophers that dealt with philosophy of logic?128.6.176.48 15:42, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'll try to do it when I get a chance. Dbtfz (talk - contribs) 15:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have added some section headings in the hopes of attracting some contributions. No particular order or structure.
--Philogo 00:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Caution
- This article is a wooly waffle free zone.
- Editors should be prepared to cite sources and quote from same
- Editors should not contribute original research
- Editors should aim for the highest degree of precision
- Editors should avoid adding material that strays from the topic under discussion
--Philogo 17:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion 0 re Article structure
- We should divice the article into sections, one for each "topic".
- The section/topics can be merged or split as the articel grows
[edit] Suggestion 1 discussion structure
Discuss each topic under the correponding section below --Philogo 21:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] General
[edit] Quotes
The Philosophy Tripos Philosophy is a study of problems which are ultimate and very general, concerned with the nature of reality, knowledge, mind, language, and value. In university courses it is studied in a manner which lays considerable emphasis on precise and careful argument. In the earlier stages of the Cambridge course, the central elements are logic, metaphysics, ethics, and philosophy of mind; later on attention is also paid to political philosophy, philosophy of science, and aesthetics. As the course proceeds the number of optional elements increases, so that in Part II there are no compulsory subjects.
...
3. Logic
...
Section A: Formal Logic
Basic concepts: formalized languages; object-language and metalanguage; use and mention; validity, implication and consistency. Propositional logic: truth-functions, tautologies, proof; soundness and completeness. Introduction to predicate logic: the language of quantifiers and variables; validity and counterexamples; elements of the logic of identity. Classes and relations; elements of probability calculus.
Section B: Philosophical logic
Deductive and inductive arguments. Problems of translation between natural and formal languages. Sentences, statements and propositions. The theory of descriptions. Necessity, analyticity and the a priori. Meaning and verification.
[University of Cambridge]
[edit] Material added
- I have added some internal links for current and future referenece and to avoid inconsistency and repetitions. The see also is pro tem. The linked article may be the main article of the linked artile may refer to this artice, in due course, as the main article.--Philogo 22:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion 2 re topic structure
Suggestions for topic structure
[edit] Suggestion 2.1 re consistent style
Since the topics are sections of a single article, the article may flow better if the topic/section had similar stucture as perhaps:
- The lede explains what the issue is and why/how it is of theoretical/philosophical interest/importance--Philogo 22:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- The body of the section has a subsection for each view taken on the issue citing and as approriate quoting from relevant texts--Philogo 22:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] suggestion 2.2 re neutrality
- Neutrality should be pursued by giving no hint that any particular view is favoured or disfavoured by the editors
- Expressions like ...was discredited by or ...was superseded by would not be neutral.--Philogo 22:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Lede
[edit] What is the relationship between the verbal rules of logic and the mental ability to reason logically?
What is an example of a verbal rule of logic?--Philogo 19:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Topics
[edit] Truth, Propositions and Meaning
We can distinguish: (a) A declarative sentence in a natural language (to allow written and spoken we might say “indicative utterance"), e.g. "Its is raining" (b) a sentence in Logic, like Fa, P&Q, which are true or false under an interpretation (c) A proposition, as the supposed "meaning" of either a declarative sentence in a natural language or of an interpreted sentence in Logic.
Sometimes the word proposition was used without it being entirely clear whether something of type (a) or (c) was intended The ontological implication of postulating "meanings" or "propositions" which have meanings is hotly debated.
--Philogo 21:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)--Philogo 13:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Truth
The current material is unsatisfactory since it cites no sources, does not set out the philosophical issues not set outs the various theories of truth in the literature--Philogo 16:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC) OR material deleted--Philogo 16:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Logical Truth
[edit] The analystic synthetic distinction
[edit] Tarski's definition of Truth
[edit] Leibniz's Law
[edit] Rationality and Logic
[edit] Are Logical Truths a priori or a posteriori knowledge? Synthetic or Analytic
[edit] The problem of non-being
[edit] Vacuous names
[edit] Do unicorns have horns and did Hamlet see a real ghost?
[edit] Does the square root of minus one have the same ontological status at the sqaure root of two
[edit] Do predicates have properties?
[edit] Sense,Reference,Connotation,Denotation,Extension,Intension
[edit] The status of the Laws of Logic
[edit] Classical Logic
[edit] Truth, Propositions and Meaning
We can distinguish: (a) A declarative sentence in a natural language (to allow written and spoken we might say “indicative utterance"), e.g. "Its is raining" (b) a sentence in Logic, like Fa, P&Q, which are true or false under an interpretation (c) A proposition, as the supposed "meaning" of either a declarative sentence in a natural language or of an interpreted sentence in Logic.
Sometimes the word proposition was used without it being entirely clear whether something of type (a) or (c) was intended Sometimes the term statement has been used to mean the same as (a) rather than (c) The ontological implication of postulating "meanings" or "propositions" which have meanings is hotly debated.
--Philogo 21:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
