BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260606T044450Z
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20180621T050000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20180626T130000
SUMMARY:Naming Logics II
UID:20260611T002649Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-bd7db559-gt5qm
TZID:Europe/Paris
LOCATION:1 Avenue des Célestins\, Vichy\, France\, 03200
DESCRIPTION:<p>Blaise Pascal famously claimed: &ldquo\;Je ne dispute jamais du nom pourvu qu&rsquo\;on m&rsquo\;avertisse du sens qu&rsquo\;on lui donne&rdquo\; (I never quarrel about a name\, provided I am apprised of the sense it which it is understood)\, Les Provinciales. However to find the right word for the right thing is a sophisticated art.&nbsp\;</p>\n<p>Modern logic has been qualified by various expressions: &ldquo\;symbolic logic&rdquo\;\, &ldquo\;formal logic&rdquo\;\, &ldquo\;mathematical logic&rdquo\;\, &ldquo\;metamathematics&rdquo\;. What does all this mean? For example &ldquo\;mathematical logic&rdquo\; is typically an ambiguous expression since it can mean both logic treated in a mathematical way or/and the logic of mathematics. &ldquo\;Symbolic logic&rdquo\; is also a mixture of different things\, it can make reference to the use of some formal mathematical signs\, or some true symbols\, like Venn&rsquo\;s diagrams. &ldquo\;Formal logic&rdquo\; is an expression put forward by Kant but ironically it has been often used to denote modern mathematical logic by opposition to traditional logic. &ldquo\;Metamathematics&rdquo\; was coined by Hilbert and he used it as synonymous to &ldquo\;Proof theory&rdquo\; (Beweistheorie) for him the. Although it has been quite popular\, cf. the classical book of Kleene Introduction to metamathematics is not much used today probably because too much related with a speficic approach to logic.</p>\n<p>Concerning the names of systems of logic\, there is also a lot of ambiguity. In which sense &ldquo\;classical logic&rdquo\; is classical\, &ldquo\;Intuitionistic logic&rdquo\; is intuitive\, &ldquo\;linear logic&rdquo\; is linear\, &ldquo\;relevant&rdquo\; logic is relevant\, &ldquo\;free logic&rdquo\; is free\, &ldquo\;intensional logic&rdquo\; is intensional? &ldquo\;Modal logic&rdquo\; encompasses many different systems\, in which sense are they all dealing with modalities and what is a modality? &ldquo\;First-order logic&rdquo\; and &ldquo\;second order logic&rdquo\; are expression which are often used. What do they mean exactly\, are the involved qualifiers appropriate? Do they make sense in relation to &ldquo\;third-order logic&rdquo\;? The expression &ldquo\;zero-order logic&rdquo\; is not much used. Does it make sense to use it to qualify propositional logic\, or does it correspond to something else?</p>\n<p>A careful analysis of names used in logic can provide a fresh look at the different logical systems and/or the concepts and methodologies used to study and develop them. It can clarify what has been done and give some clues for new developments. This is a follow up of the workshop Naming Logic(s) organized at the LMPS\, in Helsinki\, 2015</p>
ORGANIZER;CN="Jean-Yves Béziau";CN=Manuel Gustavo Isaac:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
