0

You know, I actually started learning about propositional logic by asking the same question, but about maths.

However, now am wondering what the roots are of propositional logic, I mean, we don't know propositional logic innately, we have to first learn it, but what are the informational prerequisites?

I've done some searches, and no one seems to have an answer, but more interestingly is that no one has seemed to ever asked the question (am sure am not the first, it's just that it's not appearing in the listings).

To sidetrack a little, does information ever bottom out? Do we ever reach the rockfall of knowledge where everythings just a given, without question?

user2901512
  • 2,080

1 Answers1

1

However, now am wondering what the roots are of propositional logic, I mean, we don't know propositional logic innately, we have to first learn it, but what are the informational prerequisites?

You know English, and therefore you know the rough meaning of the words "if", "not", "and" and "or". Propositional logic is merely a precise system that assigns symbols to precise semantic notions that are represented by these words, nothing more and nothing less. For example we write "$A \lor B$" to denote the assertion "Either $A$ is true or $B$ is true (or both)". In other words, it's just notation.

Same for predicate symbols, function symbols and quantifiers in first-order logic. See Introduction to Logic by Suppes, an old book but one that clearly explains the intuitions behind logic.

To sidetrack a little, does information ever bottom out? Do we ever reach the rockfall of knowledge where everythings just a given, without question?

You will have to stop somewhere, of course. Notice that you cannot define anything from nothing. To define logic, you need to already know about strings of symbols and conditionals. Without prior understanding of these concepts, you simply cannot define them. But we do understand them, and in fact we use those to bootstrap all the way to formal systems, in the sense that we define formal systems in terms of rules (if you have derived these strings, then you can derive that string). To go further and reason about formal systems and not just follow them, we need the prerequisite notion of worlds or models. See my comments and answer to this question for more about this issue.

user21820
  • 57,693
  • 9
  • 98
  • 256
  • Following this line, we could look into the origins of language itself and of course the nature of the brain wondering at what point the brain evolved the ability to process prepositional logic like signals. – jdods May 27 '16 at 12:50
  • @jdods: To a certain extent yes ultimately chasing the rabbit by its tail all the way down its hole leads to philosophy of language and mind... Your wondering thought about brain evolution, however, is dependent on a lot of assumptions... =) – user21820 May 27 '16 at 12:51
  • One might argue that "if/then" is an intrinsic property of "empirical stuff" so-to-speak. It's the intrinsic property that is equivalent to the lack of absolute chaos/nothingness. The truth of any statement is dependent on assumptions/definitions/axioms! That anything exists is essentially an assumption/axiom. Ok... Better stop to minimize risk of deletion! ;) – jdods May 27 '16 at 14:15
  • Perhaps before we bottom out, we have to go the other way. So, logic leads to maths, which leads to science, which leads to neuroscience (as it utilises all the natural sciences), and perhaps it is there where we can study the foundations of human knowledge. It's kind of like trying to reach 0 by going the other way, so to speak. Anyway, thanks for all the help guys :) – user2901512 May 27 '16 at 22:57