# Thread: An Exercise In Logic

1. Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Originally Posted by steve_bank
The OP is for you. I go by experience and common usage among peers. Logic refers in general to logical analysis using logic...how's that?

Logic is far more than syllogisms with premises and and a conclusion. Grow or stagnate in the pre 20th century thinking.
Logic is what it is and you have no idea what it is.
EB
What is logic, oter than a dictionary definition?

Linear Aristotilian logic fails for certain kinds of problems. That is where the turing Machine and the modern oprocessor comes in.There are problems that can not ne solved travesring a logic decison making netwrok.

The problem at hand if not a processor loop would require non linear clocked sequential logic. In ciomputer scine finite automata or in electrionuics a finite state machine.

A fragmentn of the problem. You get on the elevator on the 1 floor and press the 4 floor button. Someone gets on at the 3 floor and presses the 2 floor button.

Using the boolean variables what is the formal logic that ensures the elevator goes to the 4 floor first before going down to the 2 floor. Fx_button is trie if pressed and false if not.

This section gcan be done with linear formal logic.

Hint: if the person presses the 4 floor button on the first floor and nobody else gets on an expression might be
if( !F1_button and !F2_button & !F3_button & F4_button) Next_Floor = 4. The brute force approach would be to work out all combinations in a series of if staememts. This does not take into account prsssing call buttons on the floors.

I do not know how is a perfectly accptable response. Are you a curious person?

2. Originally Posted by steve_bank
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Logic is what it is and you have no idea what it is.
What is logic, oter than a dictionary definition?
You think a tree is the dictionary definition of a tree?

Logic properly speaking is a capability of the human brain.

As such, you are largely ignorant of it and maybe we would all be completely ignorant of it had Aristotle not put a finger on it 2,500 years ago, at least if looking at the rest of the world is any indication.

Mathematical logic is one definition of logic.

A preposterously bad one, at that. Like a square inscribed in a circle is a definition of that circle. Right, sort of.

Aristotle did much better. Yet, idiots and the tribe of the Brain Dead Dogmatic keep mistaking the definition for the thing itself.

Well done, Steve.
EB

3. Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Originally Posted by steve_bank
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Logic is what it is and you have no idea what it is.
What is logic, oter than a dictionary definition?
You think a tree is the dictionary definition of a tree?

Logic properly speaking is a capability of the human brain.

As such, you are largely ignorant of it and maybe we would all be completely ignorant of it had Aristotle not put a finger on it 2,500 years ago, at least if looking at the rest of the world is any indication.

Mathematical logic is one definition of logic.

A preposterously bad one, at that. Like a square inscribed in a circle is a definition of that circle. Right, sort of.

Aristotle did much better. Yet, idiots and the tribe of the Brain Dead Dogmatic keep mistaking the definition for the thing itself.

Well done, Steve.
EB
Well EB, if you ever fly a 757-300 you will be doing so courtesy of the mathematical logic of myself and assorted engineers and scientists. I worked on the magnetic proximity detecting system which for one thing enables a n emergy thrust reverser stow system if it deploys in flight, based on Boolean logic of course.Any electronics systems you use, courtesy of mathematical logic. And so on and so forth.

An inscribed square does not 'define' a circle. You must have picked it up on the net.

Never saw anyone use syllogisms or Aristotelian quotes. A circle in geometry is defined as a locus of points equidistant from an x,y coordinate. From a given center [x,y] points on a circle is defined from trigonometry. The Pythagorean Theorem.

The efficacy is what is accomplished. All the technology around you rests on mathematical logic and math. Classical logic is comparatively trivial. Maybe its important to lawyers....

Philosophical definitions while may have some utility provide no practical usage.

4. Originally Posted by steve_bank
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Mathematical logic is one definition of logic. A preposterously bad one, at that. Like a square inscribed in a circle is a definition of that circle.
An inscribed square does not 'define' a circle. You must have picked it up on the net.
As usual, you don't get the point. Mathematical logic is as good a definition of logic as a square is a definition of the circle it is inscribed into. Get it?

Originally Posted by steve_bank
Classical logic is comparatively trivial. Maybe its important to lawyers.... Philosophical definitions while may have some utility provide no practical usage.
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Aristotle did much better. Yet, idiots and the tribe of the Brain Dead Dogmatic keep mistaking the definition for the thing itself.
EB

5. Originally Posted by Speakpigeon

As usual, you don't get the point. Mathematical logic is as good a definition of logic as a square is a definition of the circle it is inscribed into. Get it?

Originally Posted by steve_bank
Classical logic is comparatively trivial. Maybe its important to lawyers.... Philosophical definitions while may have some utility provide no practical usage.
Originally Posted by Speakpigeon
Aristotle did much better. Yet, idiots and the tribe of the Brain Dead Dogmatic keep mistaking the definition for the thing itself.
EB
Mathematics is not a 'definition' of logic. Boolean Algebra, mathematical logic, is essentially based on classical logic axiomized with definitions and rules to remove any possibility of ambiguity and misinterpretation.

The philosophical term logic is a catch phrase for a number of categories. There is no one logic.

You keep asking the question what is logic and how does it work and tell people they do not get it. Philisophical approaches are inherently imprecise.

The same question can be asked, how does counting work?

6. Originally Posted by steve_bank
You keep asking the question what is logic and how does it work and tell people they do not get it. Philisophical approaches are inherently imprecise.

The same question can be asked, how does counting work?
No.

I didn't ask what logic is or how it works.

I submit simple logical arguments and ask people to say whether they think these are valid or not.

You keep misrepresenting what I do or say to a degree which suggests you're a complete idiot who doesn't even understand English properly. You are terminally irrelevant in this discussion. White noise.
EB

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•