3 ms·

I don't think that's the reason it won't be very useful. I think there are two reasons it won't be very useful: 1. Most natural language arguments are not soun

I don't think that's the reason it won't be very useful. I think there are two reasons it won't be very useful: 1. Most natural language arguments are not sound because the argument is not deductive logic. Most natural language arguments are persuasive, not formal reasoning. 2. Formal logic is method of preserving truth. It doesn't really create truth. That makes it a lot less useful. Critically, while a deductively valid argument has a true conclusion if all the premises are true, an invalid argument can still have a true conclusion. Formal logic, then, is very narrow. This is why finding a logical fallacy in an argument is often not convincing by itself. It doesn't say "your logic is flawed therefore I am right". It says "your logic is flawed and therefore should be revised and improved."

bwfan123 2y ago
> Most natural language arguments are not sound because the argument is not deductive logic. Most natural language arguments are persuasive, not formal reasoning related notes that there is some evidence that "Language is primarily a tool for communication rather than thought" [1]. ie, that language is neither necessary nor sufficient for the so-called psychic thinking process. It serves as a communication mechanism. Meanwhile, there is a hypothesis that the psychic thinking process lies beyond computation as we know it [2] in the form of turing machines etc. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07522-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07522-w [2] https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Mind-Concerning-Computers/dp/0192861980 https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-New-Mind-Concerning-Computer...