Questions tagged [natural-language]

The tag has no usage guidance.

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
-1
votes
1answer
50 views

What is the logical function of “and/or”? [closed]

I feel like it must mean the following: IF A, B, C and/or D (A, B, C, and D) and (A, B, C, or D) And I feel like it must not mean each of them individually and all of their combinations ((A), (B), (C),...
6
votes
6answers
1k views

Why don't we say the "unreasonable effectiveness of language"?

What's so special or unique about mathematics that we keep coming back to this phrasing? It isn't universal concision - there are many concepts more concisely put in English than math. Like to show ...
2
votes
2answers
149 views

Formal versions of exotic logical connectives in natural language

Formal logic tends to be concerned with minimal or at least almost-minimal sets of logical connectives. The standard logical connectives are and, or, implies, iff, neg (I couldn't use Latex for their ...
-1
votes
2answers
72 views

Is it rational to use disjunctive imperative sentences?

Suppose you tell someone, "Go to the store or go to the creek." Now, if this person is otherwise predisposed to one option, and your command triggers this predisposition, then by issuing the ...
0
votes
0answers
50 views

Is "always" omitted in mathematics?

Consider the statement: "For two numbers a,b their product is positive". For this statement to be true it must be true for every a,b right? So is the above statement equivalent to: "For two numbers a,...
3
votes
2answers
273 views

Logical fallacy: Person argues with wrong probability of event, without considering similar events

I know that this is a common error in argumentation that people make, but I don't know if there is a term for it. It's when people argue from an event being remarkable because of its low probability, ...
9
votes
1answer
633 views

Does there exist a "valid" application of Gödel's incompleteness to "logical natural language statements"?

Does there exist a "valid" application of Gödel's incompleteness to "logical natural language statements"? It can be found to sometimes be naively applied that way, even when the incompleteness ...
1
vote
1answer
285 views

Wittgenstein and theology

Wittgenstein noted that we engage in language games and quite often we borrow words from different games and misuse them such as using words with scientific connotations in religious discourse or ...
1
vote
4answers
277 views

Language and Philosophy

It is clear that many words are defined by how they are used. That context defines the word. The setting of the environment together constitutes the context, and a word is a meaningless string which ...
3
votes
0answers
148 views

Relation of Mathematical Propositions to Natural Language

Treating Natural Language as a language game, what role does it play in our understanding of mathematics? Does natural language provide meaning to mathematics? Does a proof of a conjecture, say FLT,...
0
votes
1answer
296 views

Natural language into propositional logic

Need some help putting these two examples of natural language into sentence logic. For reference, use the transcription guide below: D = you think so; E = I think so; F = it is true If you think so, ...
1
vote
1answer
117 views

Where Wittgenstein argues that thinking is done in natural language?

I am looking for a precise reference where Wittgenstein writes about the use of ordinary language when people think, and that they do not use formal logic. Even in the case of mathematics. Can you ...
2
votes
1answer
195 views

Questions about the relationship between Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations and Tractatus

I've read the Tractatus and am now working my way through Investigations, and I have a few questions about their relationship to one another. Obviously I've heard that the latter is critical of the ...
5
votes
5answers
363 views

Is an argument in natural language as logically valid as in formal logic?

Is a natural language philosophical argument which is argued strictly from first principles widely considered equally as valid as a proof written in formal logic?