Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Topic: LOGIC & MATHEMATICS
Replies: 96   Last Post: Jun 6, 2013 5:19 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 ross.finlayson@gmail.com Posts: 1,950 Registered: 2/15/09
Re: LOGIC & MATHEMATICS
Posted: Jun 2, 2013 4:13 PM

On Jun 1, 5:49 pm, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote:
> On 6/1/2013 9:52 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > "fom" <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote in message
> >news:9bWdnVL04P_k_DTMnZ2dnUVZ_t6dnZ2d@giganews.com...

> >> On 5/31/2013 10:36 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
>
> >>> Isn't indeed self-referentiality
> >>> (circularity) the essential character of the (any) purely logical
> >>> system?

>
> >> My answer to that is yes.
>
> >> I have done a great deal of work to understand how modern mathematical
> >> logic has reached the point where its foundations are almost
> >> exclusively focused on non-circularity.  So, while you see this
> >> condition as a matter of fact, such a claim in the mathematics
> >> community may get you some metaphorical version of tar and feathers.

>
> > My point was that mathematical logic is not logic, it's mathematics:
> > it's an abuse of language.  Then I don't see why the mathematician
> > should flame the logician for a claim on logic, all the more so when the
> > logician in question is saying that mathematics cannot be reduced to
> > logic in any meaningful sense (and vice versa).  In simpler terms, what
> > I can see in the logistic approach is, firstly reduce all endeavours to
> > mechanics, then call mathematics logic, finally assert that all derives
> > from logic.

>
> This helps me to understand your position better.
>
> I cannot disagree with you.  In trying to understand
> foundational claims, I find myself in awe of the fact
> that one might think that the presumed explanatory power
> of mathematics derives from linguistic forms.  On the
> other hand, the philosophical considerations of something
> like Russell's knowledge by acquaintance have significant
> merit.  Thus, the approach to logic without regard to
> what mathematicians do is extremely interesting.  They
> are very different subjects.
>
> Did you feel that I had flamed Zuhair when I pointed
> out that we had different senses of demarcation?  I
> certainly did not mean anything that way.  And, if that
> is his interpretation then I shall offer an apology.
>
> Although I do not study logic in the sense that others
> do, my questions have led me to respect logic as its
> own discipline.   I recently posted this response
> to the question "What is a proof" on math.stackexchange.com
>
> http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/397972/what-is-a-proof/404328...
>
> Although I might be wrong, I do not think it is the
> typical response from someone trained in mathematics.

Hmm, "fom" as "mitch": that makes sense as of Mitch's connectives
then as to fom's initial posts.

Mitch?

Regards,

Ross Finlayson

Date Subject Author
5/26/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/26/13 namducnguyen
5/26/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/26/13 namducnguyen
5/26/13 Peter Percival
5/26/13 namducnguyen
5/26/13 Peter Percival
5/26/13 namducnguyen
5/26/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 Charlie-Boo
5/28/13 Charlie-Boo
5/26/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/27/13 zuhair
5/27/13 fom
5/27/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/27/13 fom
5/28/13 namducnguyen
5/28/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 namducnguyen
5/29/13 Peter Percival
5/30/13 namducnguyen
5/30/13 Peter Percival
5/30/13 Peter Percival
5/30/13 namducnguyen
5/31/13 Peter Percival
5/30/13 Bill Taylor
5/30/13 Peter Percival
5/30/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/30/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/30/13 namducnguyen
5/31/13 Peter Percival
5/31/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/31/13 LudovicoVan
5/31/13 fom
5/28/13 Peter Percival
5/28/13 namducnguyen
5/27/13 Charlie-Boo
5/27/13 fom
5/28/13 Charlie-Boo
5/28/13 fom
6/4/13 Charlie-Boo
6/4/13 fom
6/5/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 LudovicoVan
5/28/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
5/28/13 LudovicoVan
5/28/13 LudovicoVan
5/28/13 fom
5/29/13 LudovicoVan
5/29/13 fom
5/30/13 LudovicoVan
5/29/13 fom
5/30/13 LudovicoVan
5/30/13 fom
5/31/13 LudovicoVan
5/31/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/31/13 LudovicoVan
5/31/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
6/1/13 LudovicoVan
6/1/13 namducnguyen
6/1/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
6/2/13 LudovicoVan
6/2/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
6/3/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
6/3/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
6/4/13 LudovicoVan
6/4/13 namducnguyen
6/4/13 Peter Percival
6/5/13 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
6/5/13 fom
6/6/13 Peter Percival
5/31/13 fom
6/1/13 LudovicoVan
6/1/13 fom
6/2/13 ross.finlayson@gmail.com
6/2/13 fom
6/2/13 Herman Rubin
6/2/13 fom
6/2/13 LudovicoVan
6/3/13 Herman Rubin
6/3/13 Peter Percival
6/4/13 Herman Rubin
6/4/13 Peter Percival
6/4/13 Peter Percival
6/1/13 fom
6/1/13 LudovicoVan
6/1/13 namducnguyen
6/5/13 Peter Percival
6/1/13 fom
6/2/13 LudovicoVan
6/2/13 fom
5/28/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 Charlie-Boo
5/27/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com
5/28/13 Charlie-Boo
5/30/13 Zaljohar@gmail.com