Share
VIDEOS 1 TO 50
"Logical consequence" - UNIT 1: CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
"Logical consequence" - UNIT 1: CLASSICAL PROPOSITIONAL LOGIC
Published: 2017/01/27
Channel: Cursos On-Line Masivos
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Tautological Implications And Logical Consequences
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Tautological Implications And Logical Consequences
Published: 2015/05/13
Channel: GATE CSE Video Lectures By Ashish Mithole
Modal logic 1.5 - logical consequence in K
Modal logic 1.5 - logical consequence in K
Published: 2013/02/07
Channel: Kane B
Using Logical Consequences - Conscious Discipline Skills
Using Logical Consequences - Conscious Discipline Skills
Published: 2011/11/22
Channel: Conscious Discipline
OCR MEI Core 1 10.03 Proof: Examples of Logical Consequence & Logical Equivalence
OCR MEI Core 1 10.03 Proof: Examples of Logical Consequence & Logical Equivalence
Published: 2016/04/14
Channel: Jack Brown
Natural and Logical Consequences
Natural and Logical Consequences
Published: 2013/03/27
Channel: Mary Lynda
Logical Consequences Strategy
Logical Consequences Strategy
Published: 2014/07/09
Channel: Sheila Heard
Build the Relationship, Change the Behavior: Natural and Logical Consequences
Build the Relationship, Change the Behavior: Natural and Logical Consequences
Published: 2016/07/01
Channel: Very Important Parents Program
Rudolf Dreikurs: Logical Consequences
Rudolf Dreikurs: Logical Consequences
Published: 2013/01/24
Channel: Leah Davis
The Concept of Logical Consequence
The Concept of Logical Consequence
Published: 2017/02/08
Channel: Lucas Hann
CERVO - Logical Consequence (EP teaser)
CERVO - Logical Consequence (EP teaser)
Published: 2016/02/11
Channel: Red Crimson Shamrock
13 Defining Logical Consequence, T ⊨ ɸ
13 Defining Logical Consequence, T ⊨ ɸ
Published: 2016/11/22
Channel: A F
OCR MEI Core 1 10.01 Proof: Logical Consequence
OCR MEI Core 1 10.01 Proof: Logical Consequence
Published: 2016/04/14
Channel: Jack Brown
[Natural Deductive Logic] Entailment || Lecture 6
[Natural Deductive Logic] Entailment || Lecture 6
Published: 2014/10/25
Channel: TheTrevTutor
Logical consequences 1
Logical consequences 1
Published: 2014/07/15
Channel: K McFatridge
Logical consequences
Logical consequences
Published: 2015/07/04
Channel: Carron Miesner
entailment, validity, and refutation
entailment, validity, and refutation
Published: 2013/02/13
Channel: Wheeler Ruml
SEM121 - Entailment
SEM121 - Entailment
Published: 2013/05/16
Channel: The Virtual Linguistics Campus
Logical Consequences vs Punishment ECE 3662
Logical Consequences vs Punishment ECE 3662
Published: 2013/10/20
Channel: ayocharmezzy
The logical consequence & next step: Team Katusha-Alpecin
The logical consequence & next step: Team Katusha-Alpecin
Published: 2016/10/12
Channel: Alpecin Cycling
4.1 Truth Tables for Entailment, Equivalence, Etc.
4.1 Truth Tables for Entailment, Equivalence, Etc.
Published: 2012/11/10
Channel: jellologic
Illogical vs Logical flow of consequences
Illogical vs Logical flow of consequences
Published: 2014/08/23
Channel: Firki
Using Natural And Logical Consequences With Kids
Using Natural And Logical Consequences With Kids
Published: 2017/04/20
Channel: Mentoring Moments For Moms
Natural and Logical Parenting Consequence Example
Natural and Logical Parenting Consequence Example
Published: 2010/06/16
Channel: Active Parenting Publishers
Logical and Natural Consequences
Logical and Natural Consequences
Published: 2016/02/25
Channel: Fred Peipman
Logical Consequences
Logical Consequences
Published: 2010/09/14
Channel: Pat Bruinsma
Related (logical) Consequences
Related (logical) Consequences
Published: 2016/03/24
Channel: hey itsbelle
Logical Consequences
Logical Consequences
Published: 2016/01/10
Channel: CAPS of Salina Parenting Education
The Logical Consequence for Not Seeing Ernest Goes to Jail
The Logical Consequence for Not Seeing Ernest Goes to Jail
Published: 2017/05/30
Channel: Zany Time
Logical Consequences 2
Logical Consequences 2
Published: 2014/07/15
Channel: K McFatridge
2 - 6 - 2.6 Logical Entailment-Introduction to Logic-Professor Mike Genesereth
2 - 6 - 2.6 Logical Entailment-Introduction to Logic-Professor Mike Genesereth
Published: 2012/05/02
Channel: OpenCourseOnline
What is Natural and Logical Consequences??
What is Natural and Logical Consequences??
Published: 2012/07/18
Channel: drmomhd
Anurag Thakur
Anurag Thakur's Removal Was A Logical Consequence, Says Justice Lodha
Published: 2017/01/02
Channel: NDTV
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Logical Consequences - Hypothetical Syllogism
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Logical Consequences - Hypothetical Syllogism
Published: 2015/05/14
Channel: GATE CSE Video Lectures By Ashish Mithole
Logical Consequences
Logical Consequences
Published: 2016/04/05
Channel: Nichole Bashor
Logical consequences 3
Logical consequences 3
Published: 2014/07/15
Channel: K McFatridge
Logical consequences... Coen 23.4 mths
Logical consequences... Coen 23.4 mths
Published: 2013/01/23
Channel: HermanJL13
Logical Consequences
Logical Consequences
Published: 2017/11/19
Channel: Oh Beehave
Foundations of Logical Consequence Mind Association Occasional Series
Foundations of Logical Consequence Mind Association Occasional Series
Published: 2016/04/22
Channel: Trana Myesera
Logical Consequences (Original Mix)
Logical Consequences (Original Mix)
Published: 2015/02/02
Channel: Various Artists - Topic
The Concept of Logical Consequence
The Concept of Logical Consequence
Published: 2017/02/14
Channel: Greenup
Dr. Charles Fay explains generic consequences
Dr. Charles Fay explains generic consequences
Published: 2009/08/06
Channel: Love and Logic
the i.l.c. ill-logical consequence.[Short-movie.2006]
the i.l.c. ill-logical consequence.[Short-movie.2006]
Published: 2006/09/07
Channel: Alessandro Gavazza
The Concept of Logical Consequence
The Concept of Logical Consequence
Published: 2016/05/20
Channel: Edith Ramos
logical consequences
logical consequences
Published: 2015/09/12
Channel: Nancy Tello
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Logical Consequences - Disjunctive And Conjunctive Syllogism
GATE - Maths - Propositional Logic - Logical Consequences - Disjunctive And Conjunctive Syllogism
Published: 2015/05/14
Channel: GATE CSE Video Lectures By Ashish Mithole
"Logical Consequences" Parenting on Purpose Workshop Series
"Logical Consequences" Parenting on Purpose Workshop Series
Published: 2013/01/18
Channel: NC12MediaCorner
Sensei Fariborz talks about "natural and Logical" consequences
Sensei Fariborz talks about "natural and Logical" consequences
Published: 2012/04/03
Channel: Fariborz Azhakh
scenario 2: logical consequences
scenario 2: logical consequences
Published: 2015/02/04
Channel: ilikecats146
Bilingual Family TV - Natural and Logical Consequences
Bilingual Family TV - Natural and Logical Consequences
Published: 2014/01/25
Channel: Bilingual Family
NEXT
GO TO RESULTS [51 .. 100]

WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Semantic consequence)
Jump to: navigation, search

Logical consequence (also entailment) is a fundamental concept in logic, which describes the relationship between statements that hold true when one statement logically follows from one or more statements. A valid logical argument is one in which the conclusion is entailed by the premises, because the conclusion is the consequence of the premises. The philosophical analysis of logical consequence involves the questions: In what sense does a conclusion follow from its premises? and What does it mean for a conclusion to be a consequence of premises?[1] All of philosophical logic is meant to provide accounts of the nature of logical consequence and the nature of logical truth.[2]

Logical consequence is necessary and formal, by way of examples that explain with formal proof and models of interpretation.[1] A sentence is said to be a logical consequence of a set of sentences, for a given language, if and only if, using only logic (i.e. without regard to any personal interpretations of the sentences) the sentence must be true if every sentence in the set is true.[3]

Logicians make precise accounts of logical consequence regarding a given language , either by constructing a deductive system for or by formal intended semantics for language . The Polish logician Alfred Tarski identified three features of an adequate characterization of entailment: (1) The logical consequence relation relies on the logical form of the sentences, (2) The relation is a priori, i.e. it can be determined with or without regard to empirical evidence (sense experience), and (3) The logical consequence relation has a modal component.[3]

Formal accounts[edit]

The most widely prevailing view on how to best account for logical consequence is to appeal to formality. This is to say that whether statements follow from one another logically depends on the structure or logical form of the statements without regard to the contents of that form.

Syntactic accounts of logical consequence rely on schemes using inference rules. For instance, we can express the logical form of a valid argument as:

All  are . 
All  are . 
Therefore, all  are .

This argument is formally valid, because every instance of arguments constructed using this scheme are valid.

This is in contrast to an argument like "Fred is Mike's brother's son. Therefore Fred is Mike's nephew." Since this argument depends on the meanings of the words "brother", "son", and "nephew", the statement "Fred is Mike's nephew" is a so-called material consequence of "Fred is Mike's brother's son," not a formal consequence. A formal consequence must be true in all cases, however this is an incomplete definition of formal consequence, since even the argument " is 's brother's son, therefore is 's nephew" is valid in all cases, but is not a formal argument.[1]

A priori property of logical consequence[edit]

If you know that follows logically from no information about the possible interpretations of or will affect that knowledge. Our knowledge that is a logical consequence of cannot be influenced by empirical knowledge.[1] Deductively valid arguments can be known to be so without recourse to experience, so they must be knowable a priori.[1] However, formality alone does not guarantee that logical consequence is not influenced by empirical knowledge. So the a priori property of logical consequence is considered to be independent of formality.[1]

Proofs and models[edit]

The two prevailing techniques for providing accounts of logical consequence involve expressing the concept in terms of proofs and via models. The study of the syntactic consequence (of a logic) is called (its) proof theory whereas the study of (its) semantic consequence is called (its) model theory.[4]

Syntactic consequence[edit]

A formula is a syntactic consequence[5][6][7][8] within some formal system of a set of formulas if there is a formal proof in of from the set .

Syntactic consequence does not depend on any interpretation of the formal system.[9]

Semantic consequence[edit]

A formula is a semantic consequence within some formal system of a set of statements

if and only if there is no model in which all members of are true and is false.[10] Or, in other words, the set of the interpretations that make all members of true is a subset of the set of the interpretations that make true.

Modal accounts[edit]

Modal accounts of logical consequence are variations on the following basic idea:

is true if and only if it is necessary that if all of the elements of are true, then is true.

Alternatively (and, most would say, equivalently):

is true if and only if it is impossible for all of the elements of to be true and false.

Such accounts are called "modal" because they appeal to the modal notions of logical necessity and logical possibility. 'It is necessary that' is often expressed as a universal quantifier over possible worlds, so that the accounts above translate as:

is true if and only if there is no possible world at which all of the elements of are true and is false (untrue).

Consider the modal account in terms of the argument given as an example above:

All frogs are green.
Kermit is a frog.
Therefore, Kermit is green.

The conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises because we can't imagine a possible world where (a) all frogs are green; (b) Kermit is a frog; and (c) Kermit is not green.

Modal-formal accounts[edit]

Modal-formal accounts of logical consequence combine the modal and formal accounts above, yielding variations on the following basic idea:

if and only if it is impossible for an argument with the same logical form as / to have true premises and a false conclusion.

Warrant-based accounts[edit]

The accounts considered above are all "truth-preservational," in that they all assume that the characteristic feature of a good inference is that it never allows one to move from true premises to an untrue conclusion. As an alternative, some have proposed "warrant-preservational" accounts, according to which the characteristic feature of a good inference is that it never allows one to move from justifiably assertible premises to a conclusion that is not justifiably assertible. This is (roughly) the account favored by intuitionists such as Michael Dummett.

Non-monotonic logical consequence[edit]

The accounts discussed above all yield monotonic consequence relations, i.e. ones such that if is a consequence of , then is a consequence of any superset of . It is also possible to specify non-monotonic consequence relations to capture the idea that, e.g., 'Tweety can fly' is a logical consequence of

{Birds can typically fly, Tweety is a bird}

but not of

{Birds can typically fly, Tweety is a bird, Tweety is a penguin}.

For more on this, see Belief revision#Non-monotonic inference relation.

See also[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d e f Beall, JC and Restall, Greg, Logical Consequence The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
  2. ^ Quine, Willard Van Orman, Philosophy of Logic.
  3. ^ a b McKeon, Matthew, Logical Consequence Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  4. ^ Kosta Dosen (1996). "Logical consequence: a turn in style". In Maria Luisa Dalla Chiara; Kees Doets; Daniele Mundici; Johan van Benthem. Logic and Scientific Methods: Volume One of the Tenth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Florence, August 1995. Springer. p. 292. ISBN 978-0-7923-4383-7. 
  5. ^ Dummett, Michael (1993) Frege: philosophy of language Harvard University Press, p.82ff
  6. ^ Lear, Jonathan (1986) Aristotle and Logical Theory Cambridge University Press, 136p.
  7. ^ Creath, Richard, and Friedman, Michael (2007) The Cambridge companion to Carnap Cambridge University Press, 371p.
  8. ^ FOLDOC: "syntactic consequence"
  9. ^ Hunter, Geoffrey, Metalogic: An Introduction to the Metatheory of Standard First-Order Logic, University of California Pres, 1971, p. 75.
  10. ^ Etchemendy, John, Logical consequence, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

Resources[edit]

  • Anderson, A.R.; Belnap, N.D., Jr. (1975), Entailment, 1, Princeton, NJ: Princeton .
  • Augusto, Luis M. (2017), Logical consequences. Theory and applications: An introduction.  London: College Publications. Series: Mathematical logic and foundations.
  • Barwise, Jon; Etchemendy, John (2008), Language, Proof and Logic, Stanford: CSLI Publications .
  • Brown, Frank Markham (2003), Boolean Reasoning: The Logic of Boolean Equations  1st edition, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA. 2nd edition, Dover Publications, Mineola, NY, 2003.
  • Davis, Martin, (editor) (1965), The Undecidable, Basic Papers on Undecidable Propositions, Unsolvable Problems And Computable Functions, New York: Raven Press  . Papers include those by Gödel, Church, Rosser, Kleene, and Post.
  • Dummett, Michael (1991), The Logical Basis of Metaphysics, Harvard University Press .
  • Edgington, Dorothy (2001), Conditionals, Blackwell  in Lou Goble (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic.
  • Edgington, Dorothy (2006), Conditionals  in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Etchemendy, John (1990), The Concept of Logical Consequence, Harvard University Press .
  • Goble, Lou, ed. (2001), The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic, Blackwell  .
  • Hanson, William H (1997), "The concept of logical consequence", The Philosophical Review, 106  365–409.
  • Hendricks, Vincent F. (2005), Thought 2 Talk: A Crash Course in Reflection and Expression, New York: Automatic Press / VIP, ISBN 87-991013-7-8 
  • Planchette, P. A. (2001), Logical Consequence  in Goble, Lou, ed., The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic. Blackwell.
  • Quine, W.V. (1982), Methods of Logic, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press  (1st ed. 1950), (2nd ed. 1959), (3rd ed. 1972), (4th edition, 1982).
  • Shapiro, Stewart (2002), Necessity, meaning, and rationality: the notion of logical consequence  in D. Jacquette, ed., A Companion to Philosophical Logic. Blackwell.
  • Tarski, Alfred (1936), On the concept of logical consequence  Reprinted in Tarski, A., 1983. Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press. Originally published in Polish and German.
  • A paper on 'implication' from math.niu.edu, Implication
  • A definition of 'implicant' AllWords
  • Ryszard Wójcicki (1988). Theory of Logical Calculi: Basic Theory of Consequence Operations. Springer. ISBN 978-90-277-2785-5. 

External links[edit]

Disclaimer

None of the audio/visual content is hosted on this site. All media is embedded from other sites such as GoogleVideo, Wikipedia, YouTube etc. Therefore, this site has no control over the copyright issues of the streaming media.

All issues concerning copyright violations should be aimed at the sites hosting the material. This site does not host any of the streaming media and the owner has not uploaded any of the material to the video hosting servers. Anyone can find the same content on Google Video or YouTube by themselves.

The owner of this site cannot know which documentaries are in public domain, which has been uploaded to e.g. YouTube by the owner and which has been uploaded without permission. The copyright owner must contact the source if he wants his material off the Internet completely.

Powered by YouTube
Wikipedia content is licensed under the GFDL and (CC) license