M.R Cohens Preface to Logic

[MSC]

Everyone should read this book. 

Until you've read it, don't talk about logic. You don't know what you're talking about.

[studiot]

1 hour ago, MSC said:

Everyone should read this book. 

Until you've read it, don't talk about logic. You don't know what you're talking about.

Perhaps if you put some of that effort you are putting into promoting a logic forum into explaining about this book  ??

Also have you looked at some past threads on logic here in the forums ?

[MSC]

4 minutes ago, studiot said:

Also have you looked at some past threads on logic here in the forums ?

I would but there is no section for it all to be found.

Why should I have to promote logic at all? It's a field of study you can take a class in at most University's and you can get degrees in it. It's important. It's not my job to explain the reality of that to others who allegedly went to university.

Just so you're all aware, I could have 1000 downvotes and still not give a shit. They aren't real communication and half the reason they are programmed into anywhere is to make the screen more addictive. "Oh yay I got an upvote, free dopamine!" "Oh no I got a downvote from a stranger, I must have been bad boohoo." 

 

So yeah, downvote away. I couldn't give less of a shit. It's the go to response for people who have no good response.

Quote

Over the past two centuries the field of logic has developed at an explosive pace into new areas far removed from the traditional syllogism and formal proof. The purpose of this well-known introductory treatment is to chart, clearly and lucidly, this new domain of today's vastly sophisticated logic. Author Morris R. Cohen explores "the periphery of logic, the relations of logic to the rest of the universe, the philosophical presuppositions which give logic its meaning, and the applications which give it importance."
Beginning with an exploration of the traditional scope of logic as the medium of formal proofs, the text pursues a modern investigation of the relationship between logic and the mind, logic and speech, logic in metaphor and fiction―and most significantly, logic and the concept of abstract reasoning as applied to the empirical world. Additional topics include logic and statistical method, probability, and scientific models. Concise and highly readable, this volume is suitable for college undergraduates and other readers interested in logic. 

 

[studiot]

59 minutes ago, MSC said:

I would but there is no section for it all to be found.

The downvotes are nothing to do with me and this seems to be the real content of your last post, along with a large clutter about not giving a shit.

 

Actually I find that using google is good for finding threads on subjects at SF.
Put in SF plus subject plus any members you know have responded.

The place for your resume of Cohen's book should surely be in this thread  ?

I have recommended some beginner's books on logic in other threads but don't know this one so I am interested to know more.

You may like to look at

E J Lemmon's "Beginning Logic"

and

Simmon's "Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis"

if you don't already know them.

I have also found the book reviews section at SF to be pretty unpopular for some reason I don't understand.

Edited October 13, 2020 by studiot

[swansont]

1 hour ago, MSC said:

I would but there is no section for it all to be found.

If they exist they would be in the philosophy section. 

Quote

Why should I have to promote logic at all? It's a field of study you can take a class in at most University's and you can get degrees in it. It's important. It's not my job to explain the reality of that to others who allegedly went to university.

Same would be true for French, English literature, history, music, and many other subjects. We don’t have those sections either.

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

Same would be true for French, English literature, history, music, and many other subjects. We don’t have those sections either.

But if I thought we should have them, would it be better to make an intellectual appeal by promoting discussion along these lines, or should I just stamp my foot and demand that it be done? And if the latter, should I also send private messages to the staff berating their lazy volunteer asses for not appreciating my subjects as much as I do?

[MSC]

41 minutes ago, studiot said:

The downvotes are nothing to do with me and this seems to be the real content of your last post, along with a large clutter about not giving a shit.

 

Actually I find that using google is good for finding threads on subjects at SF.
Put in SF plus subject plus any members you know have responded.

The place for your resume of Cohen's book should surely be in this thread  ?

I have recommended some beginner's books on logic in other threads but don't know this one so I am interested to know more.

You may like to look at

E J Lemmon's "Beginning Logic"

and

Simmon's "Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis"

if you don't already know them.

I have also found the book reviews section at SF to be pretty unpopular for some reason I don't understand.

Familiar with Simmons, not Lemmons. Will take a look when I've finished my Dostoyevsky novel.

23 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

But if I thought we should have them, would it be better to make an intellectual appeal by promoting discussion along these lines, or should I just stamp my foot and demand that it be done?

Tried that, no one was biting and INow made a point to put words into the forums mouth and drive off any interest. If at first you don't succeed, try again and again. When it is clear it won't work, stamp your feet until they listen. Worked for Wittgenstein.

46 minutes ago, studiot said:

have also found the book reviews section at SF to be pretty unpopular for some reason I don't understand.

I don't understand either. I can only guess as to what Neurotypical unwritten social BS makes that happen. Anti-intellectualism is everywhere even in intellectual places.

[studiot]

I have to say that I am not a great fan of (formal) 'Logic'.

I find it too narrow a concept.

I much prefer the phrase, "rational deduction" which has a much wider scope.

We had a thread a while back (not mine) debating whether 'Logic' is a subset of maths or Maths is a subset of 'Logic'.

Of course, they have much in common but there are differences.

A more interesting comparison, in my view, is between Maths and English and Rational Deduction.