#phillogic — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #phillogic, aggregated by home.social.
-
Now that my author copies of Logical Methods (written with @standefer) have arrived, I no longer have to worry about last-minute Christmas gift buying.
If you order *your* copies from MIT Press (or wherever else you get your books), you won’t get them in time for Christmas. It’s released to the whole world on January 3.
-
Let’s ask ChatGPT the truly serious questions, starting off with some quantified modal logic and the necessitism/contingentism debate.
(Unsurprisingly, it sounds like an undergraduate who has some sense of what the words mean but hasn't done the work and is doing a bad job of word association and looking up Wikipedia summaries.)
-
All in another day’s work, talking about proofs and models in philosophical logic, this time focusing on boolean valuations, supervaluations, and tri-valuations.
-
The slides of the talk I gave yesterday at the New Directions in Relevant Logic workshop are now available here.
https://consequently.org/presentation/2022/collection-frames-what-how-why/
Thanks to everyone who came and gave useful feedback.
-
The leftovers of another hour’s hard work, thinking about proof, meaning, and paradox.
-
I’m looking forward to giving a new talk this Friday, on my Collection Frames material, developed with Shawn Standefer.
The talk is for the second day of the New Directions in Relevant Logic online workshop <http://www.cs.cas.cz/ndr2022/index.html>.
The way the calendar is looking, this is the second-last seminar/workshop presentation I’m giving in 2022. It’s been a good run. (Just one more to go, in Lisbon, next month.)
-
CW: Request to those who’ve read Proofs and Models in Philosophical Logic
If you’ve read Proofs and Models in Philosophical Logic—my little Cambridge Element booklet—and you have any thoughts about it, would you consider writing a short sentence or two review on its Amazon page?
The one review there is singularly uninformative, and it would be nice to supplement it with some informed views.
Thanks!
-
CW: Self promotion
My talk will be based on this paper, which can be seen as Parigot’s λμ-calculus for philosophers, with the proviso that the μ rules are specified with more attention to structural rules, so the choice to add co-variables (or, what I call “alternatives”) is orthogonal to the choice to have either contraction or weakening.
https://consequently.org/writing/structural-rules-in-natural-deduction-with-alternatives/