Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
How do you define and interpret "=" in classical logic? However you want to, I guess.
Classical logic doesn't need to define equality because equality is not a logical connective.
That I need to explain this to you shows how ignorant of logic you are.
This is also why an argument using the symbol "=" has to contain premises giving the interpretation of it in logical terms. For example, you could have a premise saying something like (A = B) ⇔ (A ⇔ B). I'm sure you're going to misunderstand this but, still, that's what's needed.
The notion of equality is not used at all in logic because it's not a logical function and it's not a logical function because it's not a truth-functional function. So, all methods that use the notion of equality are mathematical theories, not methods of logic.
So, how is "=" defined in Python?
Remember, we need a logical definition, all based on logical connectives, the conjunction the disjunction etc.
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
That is a total fucking lie. Unlike Classical logic every single operator in Python is defined and documented!
Ok, good, so you'll have no difficulty producing the definition of the equal sign "=" in Python. Yes?
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
And it is all PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE! Much unlike the contents of your mind.
At least I'm here to explain and justify what I say. You, on the other hand, have proved yourself pathologically unable to explain anything or justify your position. All you can do is provide links that never have the information needed.
I couldn't find the definition of "=". It's not even mentioned.
Yeah and if you read the Bible you'll find the proof God exists.
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
Oh it sure is human logic. Like all logic - humans invented and perfected it!
You just haven't learned how to speak Mathematics.
You DO know that another name for constructive mathematics is intuitionistic logic, right. RIGHT???
And it's not logic.It's mathematics. What's new here?
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
Python is a CONSTRUCTIVE logic and so it is far closer to the flexibility of human intuition than the rigid and archaic first-order logic.
And still no concrete example.
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
Secondly - you can't model complex reality in first-order models!
Logic was never thought of as a method to model reality. Boole called logic "the laws of thought".
You've just missed the boat.
Logik wrote: ↑Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:45 pm
Not only does it give the same results as human logical reasoning, in some cases it performs even BETTER than humans!
Well, again, no concrete example. Should be easy but no, you've never provided any concrete example of anything. I wonder why this is all in the abstract.
You know that there is an army of people in poor countries paid to "click" to teach those idiotic artificial intelligences!
You are an ignoramus and a fraud.
EB