Meaning in Intuitionistic Logic | Attic Philosophy

  Рет қаралды 2,014

Attic Philosophy

Attic Philosophy

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 20
@toe_fans
@toe_fans Жыл бұрын
Very interesting indeed
@CristianGonzalez-zc9nt
@CristianGonzalez-zc9nt 2 жыл бұрын
Whyyyyy don't you have more views? It''s a shame I did not discover this channel before. Wonderful content, wonderful explanation for anyone who hasn't had close contact with this formal topic.
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks very much! Hopefully the views are coming in time. Glad this was useful!
@JosiahWarren
@JosiahWarren Жыл бұрын
No people care about logic like us
@woosix7735
@woosix7735 9 ай бұрын
This is just what i was looking for , thanks!
@vitusschafftlein77
@vitusschafftlein77 3 жыл бұрын
Very nice explanation. I'm looking forward to your next video!
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 3 жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@alexandersanchez9138
@alexandersanchez9138 Жыл бұрын
How is this related to the Heyting algebra approach?
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy Жыл бұрын
This is the kripke-style semantics, which is an alternative to Heyting algebras. There’s a feeling that, while formally good, the algebraic approach doesn’t make much philosophical sense in giving the meaning of intuitionistic logic.
@Bobby-bz8bk
@Bobby-bz8bk 2 жыл бұрын
Too few views! This is a really helpful video on a much-neglected subject.
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Bobby, glad you liked it!
@ReflectiveJourney
@ReflectiveJourney 2 жыл бұрын
Is this equivalent to finite state automata?
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 2 жыл бұрын
They look similar but they’re up to different things. Logical models are fixing what sentences are valid. Automata are abstract models of computation. There *are* connections: automata over modal models is a technique for showing why modal logics are decidable. That’s more advanced stuff!
@madvorakCZ
@madvorakCZ Жыл бұрын
OK but can we ever get x->y without obtaining y?
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy Жыл бұрын
Sure, you don’t need y to be verified to verify x->y. In a proof, deriving y on the assumption of x proves x->y.
@toe_fans
@toe_fans Жыл бұрын
The idea of only having a state of information at-a-particular-state weirdly reminds me of like whitehead's process philosophy
@rookiedoesevrythng9222
@rookiedoesevrythng9222 3 жыл бұрын
Make a series on the logical arguments for and against god
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 3 жыл бұрын
Good idea! I'm planning a series on religion, but it's not something I want to rush.
@Guz579N
@Guz579N 3 жыл бұрын
haha im writing a chapter in my uni work on this right now
@AtticPhilosophy
@AtticPhilosophy 3 жыл бұрын
Good luck!
Semantics for Intuitionistic Logic | Attic Philosophy
8:43
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 1,5 М.
Natural Deduction for Intuitionistic Logic | Attic Philosophy
19:02
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 4,7 М.
Trick-or-Treating in a Rush. Part 2
00:37
Daniel LaBelle
Рет қаралды 45 МЛН
БУ, ИСПУГАЛСЯ?? #shorts
00:22
Паша Осадчий
Рет қаралды 2,6 МЛН
Truthmaker Semantics
36:07
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 1,7 М.
Propositional Logic (MATSEC philosophy)
16:04
PhilosophyMT - Philosophy More Thought
Рет қаралды 389
How to DESTROY Anyone in an Argument
25:27
Unsolicited advice
Рет қаралды 1,3 МЛН
Intuitionistic Logic | Attic Philosophy
14:33
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 12 М.
Wittgenstein on Meaning
27:55
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 4,7 М.
Intuitionistic Logic and Constructive Proof | Attic Philosophy
12:05
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 7 М.
What is Spinoza's God?
19:36
Let's Talk Religion
Рет қаралды 624 М.
19 Common Fallacies, Explained.
8:01
Jared Henderson
Рет қаралды 582 М.
Sherlock Holmes NEVER 'Deduced' Anything
29:38
Another Roof
Рет қаралды 312 М.
Wittgenstein and the Rule Following Paradox
21:19
Attic Philosophy
Рет қаралды 6 М.
Trick-or-Treating in a Rush. Part 2
00:37
Daniel LaBelle
Рет қаралды 45 МЛН