Language, Proof and Logic

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Language, Proof and Logic Language, Proof and Logic Language, Proof and Logic Second Edition Dave Barker-Plummer, Jon Barwise and John Etchemendy in collaboration with Albert Liu, Michael Murray and Emma Pease Copyright © 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2007, 2008, 2011 CSLI Publications Center for the Study of Language and Information Leland Stanford Junior University First Edition 1999 Second Edition 2011 Printed in the United States 15 14 13 12 11 1 2 3 4 5 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Barker-Plummer, Dave. Language, proof, and logic. { 2nd ed. / Dave Barker-Plummer, Jon Barwise, and John Etchemendy in collaboration with Albert Liu, Michael Murray, and Emma Pease. p. cm. { Rev. ed. of: Language, proof, and logic / Jon Barwise & John Etchemendy. Includes index. ISBN 978-1-57586-632-1 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Logic. I. Barwise, Jon. II. Etchemendy, John, 1952- III. Barwise, Jon. Language, proof, and logic. IV. Title. BC71.B25 2011 160{dc23 2011019703 CIP 1 The acid-free paper used in this book meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences|Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. Acknowledgements Our primary debt of gratitude goes to our main collaborators on this project: Gerry Allwein and Albert Liu. They have worked with us in designing the entire package, developing and implementing the software, and teaching from and refining the text. Without their intelligence, dedication, and hard work, LPL would neither exist nor have most of its other good properties. In addition to the five of us, many people have contributed directly and in- directly to the creation of the package. First, over two dozen programmers have worked on predecessors of the software included with the package, both earlier versions of Tarski's World and the program Hyperproof, some of whose code has been incorporated into Fitch. We want especially to mention Christopher Fuselier, Mark Greaves, Mike Lenz, Eric Ly, and Rick Wong, whose outstand- ing contributions to the earlier programs provided the foundation of the new software. Second, we thank several people who have helped with the develop- ment of the new software in essential ways: Rick Sanders, Rachel Farber, Jon Russell Barwise, Alex Lau, Brad Dolin, Thomas Robertson, Larry Lemmon, and Daniel Chai. Their contributions have improved the package in a host of ways. Prerelease versions of LPL have been tested at several colleges and univer- sities. In addition, other colleagues have provided excellent advice that we have tried to incorporate into the final package. We thank Selmer Bringsjord, Rens- selaer Polytechnic Institute; Tom Burke, University of South Carolina; Robin Cooper, Gothenburg University; James Derden, Humboldt State University; Josh Dever, SUNY Albany; Avrom Faderman, University of Rochester; James Garson, University of Houston; Christopher Gauker, University of Cincinnati; Ted Hodgson, Montana State University; John Justice, Randolph-Macon Wom- en's College; Ralph Kennedy, Wake Forest University; Michael O'Rourke, University of Idaho; Greg Ray, University of Florida; Cindy Stern, Califor- nia State University, Northridge; Richard Tieszen, San Jose State University; Saul Traiger, Occidental College; and Lyle Zynda, Indiana University at South Bend. We are particularly grateful to John Justice, Ralph Kennedy, and their students (as well as the students at Stanford and Indiana University), for their patience with early versions of the software and for their extensive com- ments and suggestions. We would also like to thank the many instructors and students who have offered useful feedback since the initial publication of LPL. We would also like to thank Stanford's Center for the Study of Language v vi / Acknowledgements and Information and Indiana University's College of Arts and Sciences for their financial support of the project. Finally, we are grateful to our publisher, Dikran Karagueuzian and his team at CSLI Publications, for their skill and enthusiasm about LPL, and to Lauri Kanerva for his dedication and skill in the preparation of the final manuscript. Acknowledgements for the Second Edition One part of developing courseware packages for publication is the continual challenge of maintaining software in the face of developments in the commer- cial computer market. Since the initial publication of LPL, many operating system versions have come and gone, each requiring modifications, small and large, to the applications that are part of the package. With the publication of the second edition of LPL we are releasing the 3.x series of the Fitch, Boole and Submit applications, and the 7.x series of the Tarski's World applica- tion. While retaining the same functionality, these are essentially complete rewrites of the applications that appeared with the initial publication of LPL. The Grade Grinder too has undergone many updates and changes | it is now running in its third major incarnation, having been ported from the Solaris operating system to Mac OS X along the way. Three generations of the LPL web site have also come and gone. All of this maintenance and development requires the talent of skilled pro- grammers, and we have been fortunate in the people that have contributed to the project. Albert Liu contributed to many aspects of the software over a long period. Michael Murray's work is evident in all aspects of the desktop applications, and is primarily responsible for the web site as it currently ap- pears. Emma Pease has served as the project's system administrator for the past two years. We have modernized the appearance of the LPL applications with this new release, and the graphical design work of Aaron Kalb is evi- dent in every aspect of the software including the web site design, which was realized by Deonne Castaneda. Nik Swoboda of the Universidad Polit´ecnica de Madrid created and maintains the Linux ports of the LPL software. Leslie Rogers served as the lead QA engineer for the new applications. The LPL package would not be what it is without the dedication and hard work of all of these people, and many others, and we thank them all. Dave Barker-Plummer frequently teaches using LPL in Stanford's Philos- ophy 150 class. He uses this as an excuse to try out new teaching material and sometimes beta versions of the software. Dave would like to thank all of the students who have enrolled in those classes over the years for their patience and good humor. Acknowledgements Acknowledgements for the Second Edition / vii We have benefitted greatly from the feedback of the many instructors who have adopted the LPL package in their teaching. We would particularly like to thank Richard Zach, University of Calgary; S. Marc Cohen, University of Washington and Bram van Heuveln, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for much appreciated comments on the package. Bram suggested to us the addition of the \Add Support Steps" feature of the new Fitch program. Richard Johns of the University of British Columbia suggested the new \goggles" features which are also included in that program. The Openproof project continues to benefit from generous funding from Stanford University and from its home in the intellectually stimulating en- vironment of Stanford's Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI). As always, we are grateful to our publisher, Dikran Karagueuzian, and his team at CSLI Publications for their continued enthusiasm for LPL. Acknowledgements for the Second Edition viii / Acknowledgements Acknowledgements Contents Acknowledgements v Introduction 1 The special role of logic in rational inquiry .............. 1 Why learn an artificial language? .................... 2 Consequence and proof .......................... 4 Instructions about homework exercises (essential!) .......... 5 To the instructor ............................. 11 Web address ............................... 16 I Propositional Logic 1 Atomic Sentences 19 1.1 Individual constants ........................ 19 1.2 Predicate symbols ......................... 20 1.3 Atomic sentences .......................... 23 1.4 General first-order languages ................... 28 1.5 Function symbols (optional) ................... 31 1.6 The first-order language of set theory (optional) ........ 37 1.7 The first-order language of arithmetic (optional) ........ 38 1.8 Alternative notation (optional) .................. 40 2 The Logic of Atomic Sentences 41 2.1 Valid and sound arguments .................... 41 2.2 Methods of proof .......................... 46 2.3 Formal proofs ............................ 54 2.4 Constructing proofs in Fitch ................... 58 2.5 Demonstrating nonconsequence .................. 63 2.6 Alternative notation (optional) .................. 66 3 The Boolean Connectives 67 3.1 Negation symbol: : ........................ 68 3.2 Conjunction symbol: ^ ...................... 71 3.3 Disjunction symbol: _ ....................... 74 3.4 Remarks about the game ..................... 77 ix x / Contents 3.5 Ambiguity and parentheses .................... 79 3.6 Equivalent ways of saying things ................. 82 3.7 Translation ............................. 84 3.8 Alternative notation (optional) .................. 90 4 The Logic of Boolean Connectives 93 4.1 Tautologies and logical truth ................... 94 4.2 Logical and tautological equivalence ............... 106 4.3 Logical and tautological consequence ............... 110 4.4 Tautological consequence in Fitch ................ 114 4.5 Pushing negation around (optional) ............... 118 4.6 Conjunctive and
Recommended publications
  • Logical Consequence Philosophy of Logic and Language — HT 2017-18
    Lecture 7: Logical Consequence Philosophy of Logic and Language — HT 2017-18 Jonny McIntosh [email protected] Works by Tarski The main text by Tarski this week is ’On the Concept of Logical Consequence’; ’Truth and Proof’ is a very accessible presentation, written much later: Alfred Tarski (1936) ’On the Concept of Logical Consequence’ in his (1983) Logic, Se- mantics, Metamathematics, 2nd revised edition (Hackett). — (1969) ‘Truth and Proof’ in Scientific American 220, pp. 63-77. Secondary Reading Starred items (*) are more introductory, and good places to start. Coffa (1991) traces the historical roots of Tarski’s account of logical consequence (among other things). Quine attacks the analytic/synthetic distinction in his (1951) and defends a version of the sub- stitutional conception in his (1986). For more discussion of formality, see in particular Etchemendy (1983) and Macfarlane (2000). Etchemendy (2008) is the best place to start for his objections, though see his (1990/1999) for extended discussion. For responses, see McGee (1992), Sher (1996), Hanson (1997), Gomez-Torrente´ (1999), Soames (1999), and Paseau (2013). *JC Beall and Greg Restall (2005/2013) ’Logical Consequence’ in E. Zalta, ed. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-consequence/ *Patricia Blanchette (2001) ‘Logical Consequence’ in L. Goble, ed. The Blackwell Guide to Philosophical Logic (Blackwell). J. Alberto Coffa (1991) The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap, ed. by Linda Wessels (CUP). John Etchemendy (1983) ‘The Doctrine of Logic as Form’ in Linguistics and Philosophy 6(3), 319334. John Etchemendy (1988) ‘Tarski on Truth and Logical Consequence’ in The Journal of Symbolic Logic 53(1), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Study Report on CEF Automated Translation Value Proposition in the Context of the European LT Market/Ecosystem
    Final study report on CEF Automated Translation value proposition in the context of the European LT market/ecosystem FINAL REPORT A study prepared for the European Commission DG Communications Networks, Content & Technology by: Digital Single Market CEF AT value proposition in the context of the European LT market/ecosystem Final Study Report This study was carried out for the European Commission by Luc MEERTENS 2 Khalid CHOUKRI Stefania AGUZZI Andrejs VASILJEVS Internal identification Contract number: 2017/S 108-216374 SMART number: 2016/0103 DISCLAIMER By the European Commission, Directorate-General of Communications Networks, Content & Technology. The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Commission. The Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this study. Neither the Commission nor any person acting on the Commission’s behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. ISBN 978-92-76-00783-8 doi: 10.2759/142151 © European Union, 2019. All rights reserved. Certain parts are licensed under conditions to the EU. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. 2 CEF AT value proposition in the context of the European LT market/ecosystem Final Study Report CONTENTS Table of figures ................................................................................................................................................ 7 List of tables ..................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Complete Guide to Social Media from the Social Media Guys
    The Complete Guide to Social Media From The Social Media Guys PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:01:07 UTC Contents Articles Social media 1 Social web 6 Social media measurement 8 Social media marketing 9 Social media optimization 11 Social network service 12 Digg 24 Facebook 33 LinkedIn 48 MySpace 52 Newsvine 70 Reddit 74 StumbleUpon 80 Twitter 84 YouTube 98 XING 112 References Article Sources and Contributors 115 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 123 Article Licenses License 125 Social media 1 Social media Social media are media for social interaction, using highly accessible and scalable publishing techniques. Social media uses web-based technologies to turn communication into interactive dialogues. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, which allows the creation and exchange of user-generated content."[1] Businesses also refer to social media as consumer-generated media (CGM). Social media utilization is believed to be a driving force in defining the current time period as the Attention Age. A common thread running through all definitions of social media is a blending of technology and social interaction for the co-creation of value. Distinction from industrial media People gain information, education, news, etc., by electronic media and print media. Social media are distinct from industrial or traditional media, such as newspapers, television, and film. They are relatively inexpensive and accessible to enable anyone (even private individuals) to publish or access information, compared to industrial media, which generally require significant resources to publish information.
    [Show full text]
  • New Scientist
    APPY TALK It’s never too late to learn another language WHO’S IN THE MIRROR? How it feels to have someone else’s face COSMIC BRUISE Glimpse of another universe? WEEKLY October 31 - November 6, 2015 COMPUTER SAYS NO Your career is already in the hands of AI How civilization took root all over the world No3045 US$5.95 CAN$5.95 44 0 70989 30690 5 Science and technology news www.newscientist.com US jobs in science TRUST NO ONE Laws of physics keep your secrets safe from hackers Mind. Full. Give a gift that satisfies this holiday Subscribe and save up to 73% Visit newscientist.com/8308 or call 1-888-822-3242 and quote 8308 CONTENTS Volume 228 No 3045 This issue online newscientist.com/issue/3045 News Leader 5 Tech is closing language gaps, 8 with results we can’t predict Cosmic bruise News 6 UPFRONT Evidence we got 23andMe returns with new genetic test. bashed by another TB now world’s leading cause of death. universe? Flying through a Saturn moon plume 8 THIS WEEK Rosetta finds oxygen on comet 67P. Anaesthesia blunts emotional memories. Self-sacrificing cells use DNA as weapon. Bumblebees deliver pesticides. Asthma RUDI SEBASTIAN/PLAINPICTURERUDI drug rejuvenates brains. Dark matter may blow up stars 10 SPECIAL REPORT On the cover The plan to make meat without animals 16 IN BRIEF 40 Appy talk Neighbouring planet could be an illusion. 31 Learn another language King penguins face longer swims for food 28 Who’s in the mirror? Seeds of How it feels to have Technology revolution someone else’s face 8 Cosmic bruise 20 Your career is in the hands of recruitment AI.
    [Show full text]
  • The Liar: an Essay in Truth and Circularity, by Jon Barwise and John Etchemendy, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1987, Xii + 185 Pp., $19.95
    216 BOOK REVIEWS BULLETIN (New Series) OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 20, Number 2, April 1989 ©1989 American Mathematical Society 0273-0979/89 $1.00 + $.25 per page The Liar: An essay in truth and circularity, by Jon Barwise and John Etchemendy, Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1987, xii + 185 pp., $19.95. ISBN 0-19-505072-x Consider the classic Liar sentence: "This sentence is false." It claims that it is false. So if we assume that a sentence is true if and only if what it claims is the case, then the Liar is true if and only if it is false. People have thought about this paradox for centuries. Despite this, there is no single standard "solution." An attempted resolution of the paradox would tell us which of our intuitions are sound and which need further clarification. It would point out where and why our naive reasoning leads us to a contradiction. Modern logic applies mathematical methods to the modeling and study of truth, proof, computation, and infinity. The paradoxes of semantics and set theory were important in the development of the field. The reason for working on the paradoxes of any field is not only to secure a foundation. The deeper reason is that by introducing, discarding, and clarifying the concepts that lead to paradox we are lead to the central ideas and questions of the field. We see from The Liar that the paradoxes are still a source of inspiration in logic. The book is a new, exciting contribution to the study of truth.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Reasons Why Now Is the Time to Get Active on Linkedin
    or Lose Out In 50 Words Or Less 10 reasons why now is • More than 100 million professionals worldwide have joined LinkedIn, the the time to get active online professional net- working site, but many still do not use it. on LinkedIn • LinkedIn helps you see your connections with colleagues and friends, and their colleagues and friends. by Wayne Breitbarth • LinkedIn may help you discover your next job, customer or opportunity. CAREERS WHICH OF THESE statements applies to your or Lose Out current situation? • I am tired of people asking me to join their LinkedIn network. • I have no idea what to do after I connect with someone. • I don’t want to join LinkedIn because I’m worried my boss will think I’m looking for a new job. • I can’t figure out why complete strangers are asking me to join their LinkedIn network. • I can’t believe it would make any sense for me to put all that information about myself on the internet. • I don’t really understand the popularity of Facebook. Why would LinkedIn be any different? • I don’t have time to check one more set of emails. • I joined LinkedIn, but I’m not really sure how to get the most benefit from using it. July 2011 • QP 19 Chances are, you can relate to at least one of these connecting with people from my past, including college statements, and you’re waiting for that revelation about classmates and employees of many companies I had what the fuss is all about. You’re asking why you should worked with in the Milwaukee area during the past 30 get serious about this thing called LinkedIn.
    [Show full text]
  • Nycemf 2021 Program Book
    NEW YORK CITY ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC FESTIVAL __ VIRTUAL ONLINE FESTIVAL __ www.nycemf.org CONTENTS DIRECTOR’S WELCOME 3 STEERING COMMITTEE 3 REVIEWING 6 PAPERS 7 WORKSHOPS 9 CONCERTS 10 INSTALLATIONS 51 BIOGRAPHIES 53 DIRECTOR’S NYCEMF 2021 WELCOME STEERING COMMITTEE Welcome to NYCEMF 2021. After a year of having Ioannis Andriotis, composer and audio engineer. virtually all live music in New York City and elsewhere https://www.andriotismusic.com/ completely shut down due to the coronavirus pandemic, we decided that we still wanted to provide an outlet to all Angelo Bello, composer. https://angelobello.net the composers who have continued to write music during this time. That is why we decided to plan another virtual Nathan Bowen, composer, Professor at Moorpark electroacoustic music festival for this year. Last year, College (http://nb23.com/blog/) after having planned a live festival, we had to cancel it and put on everything virtually; this year, we planned to George Brunner, composer, Director of Music go virtual from the start. We hope to be able to resume Technology, Brooklyn College C.U.N.Y. our live concerts in 2022. Daniel Fine, composer, New York City The limitations of a virtual festival meant that we could plan only to do events that could be done through the Travis Garrison, composer, Music Technology faculty at internet. Only stereo music could be played, and only the University of Central Missouri online installations could work. Paper sessions and (http://www.travisgarrison.com) workshops could be done through applications like zoom. We hope to be able to do all of these things in Doug Geers, composer, Professor of Music at Brooklyn person next year, and to resume concerts in full surround College sound.
    [Show full text]
  • Course Description Textbook LANGUAGE, PROOF and LOGIC by Jon Barwise & John Etchemendy, Text/Software Package (Eit
    INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC Philosophy 201_Summer 2011 LeeSun Choi 730: 201:H1 (Course Index: 91390) Email: [email protected] Scott Hall 219 Office: 1 Seminary Pl. Room 003 MTWThu 10:10 – 12:05 pm Office Hours: Thu 1 pm – 2:30 pm & by Appt Course Description We can find our and others’ thoughts as rational or irrational. What makes us do this? We can point out a gap in our thoughts, discover an assumption in our claims and examine the legitimacy of our inference and reasoning. These activities belong to logic. Roughly speaking, logic is about valid inference and reasoning in our thoughts. In order to analyze our thoughts and inference procedures, we need to have a technical language to express the thoughts and the procedures with clarity and rigor. We will study this technical language called First‐Order Logic (FOL) that helps us to disambiguate our use of natural languages, e.g. English, and prevents us from making logical errors in our arguments. In addition, FOL will allow us to formulate accurately the concept of truth, proof, and valid inference. FOL has been foundational in mathematics, computer science, and cognitive science as well as philosophy. We will be encouraged to apply our learning to other academic disciplines. This course has requirements of daily homework assignments as well as midterm and final exams. Logic is immensely accumulative. If you deviate from the track at any point, you cannot proceed to the next step. It is very important to attend every class and do all the weekly assignments. You are highly encouraged to come to the office hours with any questions and problems you have in this class.
    [Show full text]
  • Stanford University, News and Publication Service, Audiovisual Recordings Creator: Stanford University
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/c8dn43sv Online items available Guide to the Stanford News Service Audiovisual Recordings SC1125 Daniel Hartwig & Jenny Johnson Department of Special Collections and University Archives October 2012 Green Library 557 Escondido Mall Stanford 94305-6064 [email protected] URL: http://library.stanford.edu/spc Guide to the Stanford News SC1125 1 Service Audiovisual Recordings SC1125 Language of Material: English Contributing Institution: Department of Special Collections and University Archives Title: Stanford University, News and Publication Service, audiovisual recordings creator: Stanford University. News and Publications Service Identifier/Call Number: SC1125 Physical Description: 63 Linear Feetand 17.4 gigabytes Date (inclusive): 1936-2011 Information about Access The materials are open for research use. Audio-visual materials are not available in original format, and must be reformatted to a digital use copy. Ownership & Copyright All requests to reproduce, publish, quote from, or otherwise use collection materials must be submitted in writing to the Head of Special Collections and University Archives, Stanford University Libraries, Stanford, California 94305-6064. Consent is given on behalf of Special Collections as the owner of the physical items and is not intended to include or imply permission from the copyright owner. Such permission must be obtained from the copyright owner, heir(s) or assigns. See: http://library.stanford.edu/depts/spc/pubserv/permissions.html. Restrictions also apply to digital representations of the original materials. Use of digital files is restricted to research and educational purposes. Cite As [identification of item], Stanford University, News and Publication Service, Audiovisual Recordings (SC1125). Dept. of Special Collections and University Archives, Stanford University Libraries, Stanford, Calif.
    [Show full text]
  • Logic Is Awesome. PROOF THAT LOGIC IS AWESOME
    PROOF THAT LOGIC IS AWESOME Call the following sentence P: “If this conditional is true, then Logic is Awesome”. I will now prove that P is in fact true. P is a conditional. I will assume its antecedent and then show that its consequent would follow. So we assume that “this conditional is true”. “this conditional” refers to sentence P so I now have by assumption that P is true. But since P is true and we also have its antecedent, then its consequent follows by modus ponens so given my assumption of “this conditional is true” then Logic is Awesome so by conditional proof (→Intro), I have now proved P. But then the antecedent “this conditional is true” is in fact true since I have just proved that P is true. Therefore by modus ponens, it follows that: Logic is Awesome. Monday, May 5, 2014 SUMMARY OF THE COURSE Monday, 5 May Monday, May 5, 2014 WHAT IS LOGIC? Monday, May 5, 2014 WHAT IS LOGIC? Reasoning is ubiquitous in every aspect of life. Arguably, the foundation of reasoning is consistency. Consistency is intimately related to the concept of logical consequence. Monday, May 5, 2014 WHAT IS LOGIC? Reasoning is ubiquitous in every aspect of life. Arguably, the foundation of reasoning is consistency. Consistency is intimately related to the concept of logical consequence. We say that some proposition P is a logical consequence of a set of propositions S if it is impossible for every proposition in S to be true and P to be false. Monday, May 5, 2014 WHAT IS LOGIC? Reasoning is ubiquitous in every aspect of life.
    [Show full text]
  • Euler Diagrams As an Introduction to Set-Theoretical Models
    Euler diagrams as an introduction to set-theoretical models Ryo Takemura Nihon University 5-2-1 Kinuta, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 157-8570, Japan [email protected] Abstract Understanding the notion of a model is not always easy in logic courses. Hence, tools such as Euler diagrams are frequently applied as informal illustrations of set-theoretical models. We formally investigate Euler diagrams as an introduction to set-theoretical models. We show that the model-theoretic notions of validity and invalidity are characterized by Euler diagrams, and, in particular, that model construction can be described as a manipulation of Euler diagrams. 1998 ACM Subject Classification I.2.0 Philosophical foundations Keywords and phrases Euler diagrams; Set-theoretical model; Counter-model 1 Introduction Logic is traditionally studied from the different viewpoints of syntax and semantics. From the syntactic viewpoint, formal proofs are investigated using proof systems such as natural deduction and sequent calculus. From the semantic viewpoint, set-theoretical models of sentences are usually investigated. In contrast to a proof, which shows the validity of a given inference, we usually disprove an inference by constructing a counter-model. A counter- model is one in which all premises of a given inference are true, but its conclusion is false. The notions of proofs and models are traditionally defined in the fundamentally different frameworks of syntax and semantics, respectively, and the completeness theorem, one of the most basic theorems of logic, provides a bridge between them. In university courses, logic is usually taught along such lines. As the notion of a proof appears naturally in mathematics courses, students are, to some extent, familiar with it.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007 a World at Risk Democracy Fellows the NEWSLETTER of FREEMAN SPOGLI INSTITUTE for INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
    THE NEWSLETTER OF THE FREEMAN SPOGLI INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL STUDIES inside: IMPROVING HEALTH AND GOVERNANCE P 2 winter issue INNOVATION IN CHINA P 6 KEEPING THE BOMB FROM IRAN P 7 OFFSHORE AQUACULTURE LEGISLATION P 10 2007 EU INTEGRATION AND INTERVENTION P 11 PEOPLE, BOOKS, PUBLICATIONS P 14 stanford university A WORLD AT RISK Freeman Spogli Institute’s Second Annual International Conference and Dinner “What has changed is not the risk, but the “As Stanford University’s primary forum number and complexity of problems that for the consideration of the major interna- face the world today. The challenges of tional issues of our time, we at FSI are the 21st century require that universities dedicated to interdisciplinary research and change. We must move beyond tradi- teaching on some of the most pressing tional academic boundaries and embrace and complex problems facing the global new ways of doing research.” – stanford community today.” – coit d. “chip” blacker, provost john w. etchemendy director, freeman spogli institute 1 On November 16, 2006, FSI convened its annual international conference, A World at Risk, devoted to systemic and human risk confronting the global community. Remarks by Stanford Provost John Etchemendy, FSI Director Coit Blacker, former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Secretary of State George Shultz set the stage for stimulating discussions. Interactive panel sessions encouraged in-depth exploration of major issues with Stanford faculty, outside experts, and policymakers. HERE, AND ON PAGES 8 AND 9, ARE CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS “The Middle East has descended into hate, “We are facing new dangers and we must “The world has never been at a more violence, and chaos.
    [Show full text]