Baez, John C., and Mike Stay. “Physics, Topology, Logic and Computation: A Rosetta Stone.” Quantum Physics; Category Theory. arXiv:0903.0340 [Quant-Ph] 813 (March 2, 2009): 95–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12821-9_2.

Breaking down former President Donald Trump’s rambling linguistic style by [[Steve Inskeep]]

Porte logique XNOR Logic gate XNOR

Ref: https://pressbooks.etsmtl.ca/circuitslogiques/chapter/circuits-logiques-combinatoires-et-sequentiels-5/

https://boffosocko.com/2016/09/30/complexity-isnt-a-vice-10-word-answers-and-doubletalk-in-election-2016/

Discussed as part of "storytelling vs. logic" at FoTL

Everything law, natural laws, logical calculi and cellular automata and beyond.

If Iago is reason, and Roderigo seeks reason, and Iago is the cause of all this destruction, then it should be said that the human need for reason (which crushes emotion) is what brings downfall. Logic is what has cut off Othello's motivation (heart). Iago is the personalization of human reason

since when do rapists accept a "no"?<br /> rape logic: yes means yes. no means yes.

for - Bee and Flower Logic - subconscious unity? - uniting without consciously uniting - agreement through actions, not words

• Identify the types of strategic congruences
• that do not require
  • people or organizations to be or
  • think the same: “bee-and-flower logic.”
• The bee does not consciously know it is “exchanging a service for a product” (my pollen distribution for your pollen).
• The flower does not know it is exchanging a product for a service (my pollen for your transport).
• However, they sustain each other despite never entering into an agreement.
• Cosmolocalism, for example, relies on this logic,
• as people do not need to agree on an analysis or vision to share in the fruits of the virtuous cycle.
• Let us look for all the places this bee-and-flower logic can be enacted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_without_organs

How to protect against these sorts of outcomes? Relation to identity and cognitive biases?

Thanks Sascha for an excellent primer on the internal machinations of our favorite machines beyond the usual focus on the storage/memory and indexing portions of the process.

Said another way, a zettelkasten is part of a formal logic machine/process. Or alternately, as Markus Krajewski aptly demonstrates in Paper Machines (MIT Press, 2011), they are early analog storage devices in which the thinking and logic operations are done cerebrally (by way of direct analogy to brain and hand:manually) and subsequently noted down which thereby makes them computers.

Just as mathematicians try to break down and define discrete primitives or building blocks upon which they can then perform operations to come up with new results, one tries to find and develop the most interesting "atomic notes" from various sources which they can place into their zettelkasten in hopes of operating on them (usually by juxtaposition, negation, union, etc.) to derive, find, and prove new insights. If done well, these newly discovered ideas can be put back into the machine as inputs to create additional newer and more complex outputs continuously. While the complexity of Lie Algebras is glorious and seems magical, it obviously helps to first understand the base level logic before one builds up to it. The same holds true of zettelkasten.

Now if I could only get the printf portion to work the way I want...

https://zettelkasten.de/posts/reading-is-searching/

Not a bad piece, but likely obvious for those with any work in formal logic or mathematics. For those without it who are working in nascent zettelkasten, a good introduction.

reply to u/AndreSanch at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/158gy35/im_using_latex_to_create_my_zettel_notes/

This sort of thing has certainly been done before by many. Be careful of going overboard.

If you don't already have a list of most of the common LaTeX math symbols, here's a good starter list, but make sure that your assigned meaning to them from an argumentation perspective is either "standard" or you've written it down for later use/memory. (There's nothing worse than a 10 year old note whose symbols you no longer remember.)

If you haven't done a course in philosophy or logic (something along the lines of Elements of Logic), then that may also help you in terms of many of the common uses/meanings, though there are a variety of meanings to various symbols through time, so take care.

Scribes and scholars over time have used a variety of symbols and annotations to mean various things, some of which were standardized in various contexts. For more on this take a look at some of Evina Stein's work and research on historic texts. Some of this might include:

Steinová, Evina. “Nota and Require. The Oldest Western Annotation Symbols and Their Dissemination in the Early Middle Ages.” Scribes and the Presentation of Texts (from Antiquity to c. 1550). Proceedings of the 20th Colloquium of the Comité International de Paléographie Latine, 2021, 473–89. https://doi.org/10.1484/M.BIB-EB.5.124987.<br /> ———. Notam Superponere Studui: The Use of Annotation Symbols in the Early Middle Ages. Brepols, 2019.<br /> Steinova, Evina. “Technical Signs in Early Medieval Manuscripts Copied in Irish Minuscule.” In The Annotated Book in the Early Middle Ages: Practices of Reading and Writing, edited by M. J. Teeuwen and I. Van Renswoude, 37–85. Brepols, 2017.

For those interested in scratching the surface of some possibilities and history, I might recommend:

Scheinerman, Edward R. Mathematical Notation: A Guide for Engineers and Scientists. CreateSpace, 2011.

Your note about Forte, while cute and clever doesn't necessarily mean that he's an old man, however, so take care about your propositions and what you draw from them or else your system won't hold up for long.

Shorthand notations or symbols in one's notes can be used to provide help in structuring arguments. Small indicators like "see: x", "see also: y", or "but see: z" can be used for adding supporting, comparison, or contradictory material respectively.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_logic_symbols

Dramatically important in mathematics, but also in every other area.

This is a hasty generalization and ignores the fact that WITHOUT inclusive curriculums strides have been made toward equity. While I agree with the basic premise of this article, there are a few weak points in the argumentation itself.

I think the Author may be committing a begging the question fallacy here. Each type of school creates citizens, but the difference is the quality of awareness within the children entering society post education. This statement is circular within the argument.

I would argue that there is a fair amount of cognitive dissonance present on the side introducing these bills. Their lived experience and perception of themselves conflicts with the reality that they are white supremacists and are actively suppressing BIPOC history in an effort to reconcile their perceptions of how they live.

This is a reference to a great book "Beginning Mathematical Logic: A Study Guide [18 Feb 2022]" by Peter Smith on "Teach Yourself Logic A Study Guide (and other Book Notes)". The document itself is called "LogicStudyGuide.pdf".

It focuses on mathematical logic and can be a gateway into understanding Gödel's incompleteness theorems.

I found this some time ago when looking for a way to grasp the difference between first-order and second-order logics. I recall enjoying his style of writing and his commentary on the books he refers to. Both recollections still remain true after rereading some of it.

It both serves as an intro to and recommended reading list for the following: - classical logics - first- & second-order - modal logics - model theory<br /> - non-classical logics - intuitionistic - relevant - free - plural - arithmetic, computability, and incompleteness - set theory (naïve and less naïve) - proof theory - algebras for logic - Boolean - Heyting/pseudo-Boolean - higher-order logics - type theory - homotopy type theory

Missing highlight from preceding page:

A property \( P \) is effectively decidible if and only if there is an algorithm (a finite set of instructions for a deterministic computation) ...

Isn't this related to the idea of left & right adjoints in category theory? iirc, there was something about the "canonical construction" of something X being the best solution to a particular problem Y (which had another framing like, "Problem Y is the most difficult problem for which X is a solution")

Different thought: the Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondance connects intuitionistic logic, typed lambda calculus, and cartesian closed categories.

Maths, Logic, Computer Science, Chess, Music, and Dance

A similar observation could be made about mathematics, logic, and computer science. Sadly, public education in the states seems to lose sight that the formalisms in these domains are merely the tools of the trade and not the trade itself (ie, developing an understanding of the fundamental/foundational notions, their relationships, their instantiations, and cultivating how one can develop capacity to "move" in that space).

Similarly, it's as if we encourage children that they need to merely memorize all the movements of chess pieces to appreciate the depth of the game.

Or saying "Here, just memorize these disconnected contortions of the hand upon these strings along this piece of wood. Once you have that down, you've experienced all that guitar, (nay, music itself!) has to offer."

Or "Yes, once, you internalize the words for these moves and recite them verbatim, you will have experienced all the depth and wonder that dance and movement have to offer."

However, none of these examples are given so as to dismiss or ignore the necessity of (at least some level of) formalistic fluency within each of these domains of experience. Rather, their purpose is to highlight the parallels in other domains that may seem (at first) so disconnected from one's own experience, so far from one's fundamental way of feeling the world, that the only plausible reasons one can make to explain why people would waste their time engaging in such acts are 1. folly: they merely do not yet know their activities are absurd, but surely enough time will disabuse them of their foolish ways. 2. madness: they cannot ever know the absurdity of their acts, for "the absurd" and "the astute" are but two names for one and the same thing in their world of chaos. 3. apathy: they in fact do see the absurdity in their continuing of activities which give them no sense of meaning, yet their indifference insurmountably impedes them from changing their course of action. For how could one resist the path of least resistance, a road born of habit, when one must expend energy to do so but that energy can only come from one who cares?

Or at least, these 3 reasons can surely seem like that's all there possibly could be to warrant someone continuing music, chess, dance, maths, logic, computer science, or any apparently alien craft. However, if one takes time to speak to someone who earnestly pursues such "alien crafts", then one may start to perceive intimations of something beyond their current impressions

The contorted clutching of the strings now seems... coordinated. The pensive placement of the pawns now appears... purposeful. The frantic flailing of one's feet now feels... freeing. The movements of one's mind now feels... marvelous.

So the very activity that once seemed so clearly absurd, becomes cognition and shapes perspectives beyond words

I came here looking for a way to exclude certain emails from searches in Gmail. I was trying to make sure some emails that were archived don't show up, and this approach works (but the Boolean operators must be capitalized):

(label:label_I_want AND NOT label:label_I_dont)

If the unwanted label msgs are a part of a conversation thread containing the wanted msgs, then I'll need to turn this off first:

Go to the main Settings page, look for the “Conversation View” section, select the option to turn it off, and save changes. If you change your mind, you can always go back. source

Info Select was on this list of DEVONthink Windows alternatives. Looks like "personal information management" preceded the boom of "personal knowledge management"

This is a pretty good example of a strawman argument. The author uses the correct exponential growth formula to describe a precise 1% improvement rate. But that's not what the 1% improvement idea is about. For instance, consider https://nextbigideaclub.com/magazine/get-1-better-every-day/19161/ or https://betterhumans.pub/continuous-improvement-how-to-get-1-better-every-day-from-today-a8128c942c61 The argument isn't based on a strict interpretation of 1%.

The Technique of Controversy: Principles of Dynamic Logic by Boris B. Bogoslovsky https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Technique_of_Controversy/P-rgAwAAQBAJ?hl=en

What was Dewey's contribution here?

The Gospel of Technology by C. E. Ayers https://archive.org/details/americanphilosop00kall/page/24/mode/2up

This is the wrong approach, because it imposes modern norms on past times. It's illogical and superficial.

It would be appropriate, though, to carefully review the histories of past logicians and to document more fully the roles that others played in their work, with a clinical and factual dispassion, and with the intention of being accurate and attributing progress to whoever actually did the work.

The only reason there wouldn't be enough BIPOC representation in SEP is if people were knowingly excluding that work because they were BIPOC.

Of course, sometimes you have to know an author is BIPOC to be able to appreciate why their point of view may be different than typical. It can provide context.

But even then, one must intentionally exclude people because of their background. How can one do that systemically and sleep at night?

Oh, come on. "Genius culture" exists in all academia to one degree or another. To say that logic is somehow more susceptible to this than other disciplines is stunningly arrogant and cloistered thinking.

5.5 Logic, reason, and common sense are your best tools for synthesizing reality and understanding what to do about it.

Title: JAN WESTERHOFF ON NĀGĀRJUNA Author:Adamson, Peter & Negary, Jardin (???) Date: 23 July 2017

Title: 46. NO FOUR WAYS ABOUT IT: NĀGĀRJUNA’S TETRALEMMA Author:

insightful explanation of Nagarjuna's tetralemma!

False. Per Hitchens's Razor, "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Put simply, the responsibility for proving a claim rests with those making the claim. One may safely discount the possibility of anything that cannot be proven.

See also "Russel's Teapot".

Link to idea from The Dawn of Everything about comparative anthropology.

This is an interesting starting point for discussing the ills of comparative anthropology which will tend to put one culture or society over another in some sort of linear way and an expectation of equivalence relations (in a mathematical sense).

Humans and their societies and cultures aren't always reflexive, symmetric, or transitive. There may not be an order relation (aka simple order or linear order) on humanity. We may not have comparability, nonreflexivity, or transitivity.

(See page 24 on Set Theory and Logic in Topology by James R. Munkres for definition of "order relation")

This is exactly my problem with "knowledge" and it's inherent vagueness. I think it's far better for us all to admit that we have virtually no knowledge and instead only have beliefs of varying strengths.

Machine translation

Johannes Schmidt from the Niklas Luhmann Archive remarked that the box follows a fuzzy logic in many respects. Imagine a botanist whose classification system is shaken by an unexpected plant find. Similarly, Schmidt and his CCeH colleagues Martina Gödel, Patrick Sahle and Sebastian Zimmer had to repeatedly improve and modify their data model due to surprising note features.

The form and shape of Niklas Luhmann's zettelkasten was not as static as some may have supposed.

Isn't this an example of the law of the excluded middle? If LoEM doesn't exist (in Gisin's theory), then could there be information that isn't either created or destroyed?

ReconfigBehSci on Twitter: ‘there is a literature on arguments from ignorance (viewed from a Bayesian perspective) that can help here, I think https://t.co/tg1Jlrlldg’ / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved 3 September 2021, from https://twitter.com/SciBeh/status/1432409133957869572

Saw this mentioned/described in the first session of Roam Book Club 5 [video].

Inductive, since multiple constructors are generalized to a type. And as seen in this example, data types can also facilitate mathematical induction.

Crocker-Buque, T., & Mounier-Jack, S. (2018). Vaccination in England: A review of why business as usual is not enough to maintain coverage. BMC Public Health, 18(1), 1351. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-6228-5

Aarts, A. A. (2021). Psychological Science replicates just fine, thanks. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/h4byg

Another specific example of this has been noted by Zeynep Tufekci of an economist becoming the face of criticism of the education space being open or closed during the coronavirus pandemic. The woman, who had no background in public health or epidemiology, became the public face of the argument about whether schools should be open or closed.

Jacobson, R. M., Targonski, P. V., & Poland, G. A. (2007). A taxonomy of reasoning flaws in the anti-vaccine movement. Vaccine, 25(16), 3146–3152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.01.046

new tag?:

• code that is universally relevant/valuable
• non - _-specific logic

request-specific logic

quibble:a slight objection or criticism about a trivial matter.

理论论据

I think logic-less templates are overrated. We already have logic in components with {#if} so I don't see what the concern is about logic in templates.

This was essentially the logical memory method espoused by Peter Ramus in the mid-1500's. He's a major source of the reason we don't use a broader number of methods within the art of memory in modern society. We need to remedy this error. I feel like the authors are woefully unaware of a lot of history and psychology here.

Argument Quality in Real World Argumentation. (2020). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(5), 363–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.01.004

US, A. B., The Conversation. (n.d.). Coronavirus Responses Highlight How Humans Have Evolved to Dismiss Facts That Don’t Fit Their Worldview. Scientific American. Retrieved June 30, 2020, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coronavirus-responses-highlight-how-humans-have-evolved-to-dismiss-facts-that-dont-fit-their-worldview/

Financial Times. ‘Making Sense of Nonsensical Covid-19 Strategy’. Accessed 3 June 2020. http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2020/06/01/1591001732000/Making-sense-of-nonsensical-Covid-19-strategy/.

知乎：

水果是对部分可以食用的植物果实和种子的统称。这个是内涵。 它的外延包括了一切符合定义的事物，如：苹果，梨子，香蕉

In Fowkes, the 'form of appearance' or the Erscheinungsform.

Exchange value is the 'form of appearance' of something contained in it, yet distinguishable from it--this 'third thing' will turn out to be 'socially necessary labor time'.

Book Two of Hegel's Science of Logic, the Doctrine of Essence, begins with a chapter on 'Der Schein,' which appears in A.V. Miller's translation as "Illusory Being" (Hegel, Science of Logic, trans. by A.V. Miller, pp. 393-408).

Here, Hegel describes "schein" as "reflected immediacy, that is immediacy which is only by means of its negation and which when contrasted with its mediation is nothing but the empty determination of the immediacy of negated determinate being," (p. 396).

Hegel goes on to remark that "Schein" is "the phenomenon [Phänomen] of skepticism, and the Appearance [Erscheinung] of idealism," (p. 396).

In describing exchange value as the 'Erscheinungsform' of 'something contained in it, yet distinguishable from it'--which will be labor--Marx is clearly flirting with the terminology surrounding "Illusory Being" in the Science of Logic, which suggests labor as the 'thing-in-itself' of the exchange value. Exchange-value is the reflected immediacy that conceals the congealed labor that it is its essence.

The passage as a whole is suggestive of how exchange value will wend its way through Marx's demonstration, unfolding from itself determinations of itself.

Before presenting a long, difficult quotation from Hegel, I think the most straightforward way to present this reference to Hegel is to say present the argument as follows:

In Kantian idealism, we find that the 'thing-in-itself' cannot become an object of knowledge; consciousness only ever has immediate access to the form of appearance, the 'sensible form' of a 'thing-in-itself' which never presents itself to consciousness. In referring to the value form as the 'form of appearance' of something else which does not appear, Marx is saying that just as idealism subordinates the objectivity of the world to its appearance for consciousness, exchange-value represents immediately an essence that it suppresses, and implicitly, denies the possibility of knowledge of this essence.

Hegel writes, "Skepticism did not permit itself to say 'It is'; modern idealism did not permit itself to regard knowledge as a knowing of the thing-in-itself; the illusory being of skepticism was supposed to lack any foundation of being, and in idealism the thing-in-itself was not supposed to enter into knowledge. But at the same time, skepticism admitted a multitude of determinations of its illusory being, or rather its illusory being had for content the entire manifold wealth of the world. In idealism, too, Appearance [Erscheinung] embraces within itself the range of these manifold determinateness. This illusory being and this Appearance are immediately thus manifoldly determined. This content, therefore, may well have no being, no thing or thing-in-itself at its base; it remains on its own account as it is; the content has only been transferred from being into an illusory being, so that the latter has within itself those manifold determinateness, which are immediate, simply affirmative, and mutually related as others. Illusory being is, therefore, itself immediately determinate. It can have this or that content; whatever content it has, illusory being does not posit this itself but has it immediately. The various forms of idealism, Leibnizian, Kantian, Fichtean, and others, have not advanced beyond being as determinateness, have not advanced beyond this immediacy, any more than skepticism did. Skepticism permits the content of its illusory being to be given to it; whatever content it is supposed to have, for skepticism it is immediate. The monad of Leibniz evolves its ideas and representations out of itself; but it is not the power that generates and binds them together, rather do they arise in the monad like bubbles; they are indifferent and immediate over against one another and the same in relation to the monad itself. Similarly, the Kantian Appearance [Erscheinung] is a given content of perception; it presupposes affections, determinations of the subject, which are immediately relatively to themselves and to the subject. It may well be that the infinite obstacle of Fichte's idealism has no underlying thing-in-itself, so that it becomes purely a determinateness in the ego; but for the ego, this determinateness which it appropriates and whose externality it sublates is at the same time immediate, a limitation of the ego, which it can transcend but which has in it an element of indifference, so that although the limitation is in the ego, it contains an immediate non-being of the ego." (p. 396-397).

In Lenin's notebooks on Hegel's Science of Logic, these sections provoke a considerable degree of excitement. Lenin's 'Conspectus of Hegel's Science of Logic' can be accessed via Marxists.org here:

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1914/cons-logic/ch02.htm

In Ben Fowkes translation in the Penguin edition, we find "The wealth of societies…appears as."

In the German edition, Marx uses the verb erscheint ('scheint' shares an etymological link to the English word, shine.)

On p. 127, Marx uses the Hegelian expression, Erscheinungsform (form of appearance). In this edition, it is rendered "the phenomenal form."

Marx uses this term to describe the way that, in order for exchange-values to present an equivalence between two distinct use-values (i.e. x corn, y silk) they must possess some common element of identical magnitude. As exchange-values, commodities "cannot be anything other than the mode of expression, the 'form of appearance' [Erscheinungsform], of a content distinguishable from it," (Karl Marx. Capital, Vol. I, p. 127)