5 ms·

Courses in symbolic logic (usually titled "Logic I & II" - propositional logic and predicate logic ) are good for mathematical thinking. But usually the instruc

Courses in symbolic logic (usually titled "Logic I & II" - propositional logic and predicate logic ) are good for mathematical thinking. But usually the instructor will also take time to go through the common fallacies of argumentation [Edit: See "fallacies" in Google]. Often this is the only explicit exposure to coherent argumentation that a student gets in his college career. Had I to do it over again I would have started by studying rhetoric (the art of persuasion), a larger field of study that seems (to me) more relevant.

temp453463343 13y ago
Not sure if you were trying to be snarky with the lmgtfy but that didn't actually bring anything up. Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies I quickly looked through them and didn't find anything directly relating to symbolic logic. Most of symbolic logic was trying to understand what was at first pretty confusing notation and then trying to figure out how to represent things like sets without using Venn Diagrams. At the end of the day I don't think you start to understand any larger truths about logic. Knowing how to write out De Morgan's law with symbols is frankly kinda useless. Maybe it helps with mathematical thinking, but that's not relevant to most people.
- giardini 13y ago
  I didn't mean to imply that the fallacies have anything in particular to contribute to symbolic logic. It's just that, when one takes a logic course, one expects to leave the class with better logical skills, both formal and informal. Gracefully, most logic teachers and books take the time to briefly cover some additional topics such as the fallacies.
saraid216 13y ago
This is an excellent introductory book to argumentation: http://www.amazon.com/Thank-You-Arguing-Aristotle-Persuasion/dp/0307341445 http://www.amazon.com/Thank-You-Arguing-Aristotle-Persuasion...

temp453463343 13y ago

Not sure if you were trying to be snarky with the lmgtfy but that didn't actually bring anything up. Look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies I quickly looked through them and didn't find anything directly relating to symbolic logic. Most of symbolic logic was trying to understand what was at first pretty confusing notation and then trying to figure out how to represent things like sets without using Venn Diagrams. At the end of the day I don't think you start to understand any larger truths about logic. Knowing how to write out De Morgan's law with symbols is frankly kinda useless. Maybe it helps with mathematical thinking, but that's not relevant to most people.

giardini 13y ago
I didn't mean to imply that the fallacies have anything in particular to contribute to symbolic logic. It's just that, when one takes a logic course, one expects to leave the class with better logical skills, both formal and informal. Gracefully, most logic teachers and books take the time to briefly cover some additional topics such as the fallacies.

saraid216 13y ago

This is an excellent introductory book to argumentation: http://www.amazon.com/Thank-You-Arguing-Aristotle-Persuasion/dp/0307341445 http://www.amazon.com/Thank-You-Arguing-Aristotle-Persuasion...