Re: Frege against the Booleans
Jon Awbrey <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.inquiry |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ben, Just to give a prototypical example, one of the ways that the distinction between concepts and judgments worked its way through analytic philosophy and into the logic textbooks that I knew in the 60s was in the distinction between a "conditional" ( → or -> ) and an "implication" ( ⇒ or => ). The first was conceived as a function (from a pair of truth values to a single truth value) and the second was conceived as a relation (between two truth values). The relationship between them was Just So Storied by saying that asserting the conditional or judging it to be true gave you the implication. I think it took me a decade or more to clear my head of the dogmatic slumbers that this sort of doctrine laid on my mind, mostly because the investiture of two distinct symbols for what is really one and the same notion viewed in two different ways so obscured the natural unity of the function and the relation. Cf. http://mywikibiz.com/Logical_implication Regards, Jon -- academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/ inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache _______________________________________________ Inquiry mailing list [email protected] http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/inquiry