You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Eugine_Nier comments on [LINK] Steven Landsburg "Accounting for Numbers" - response to EY's "Logical Pinpointing" - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: David_Gerard 14 November 2012 12:55PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (46)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 16 November 2012 01:34:54AM 1 point [-]

Why isn't it necessary to pin point FOL?

Comment author: drnickbone 19 November 2012 08:20:31PM 0 points [-]

Well, the topic is "logical pinpointing", and the attempt to logically pinpoint logic itself sounds rather circular...

However, if we really want to, we can describe a computer program which systematically checks any given input string to decide whether it constitutes a valid string of deductions in FOL. Then "first order logic" is anything to which the program gives the answer "Valid". That's possible for FOL, but not for SOL. If you want to further pinpoint what a "program" is, the best way to do that is to find a computer and run the d**n thing!