Thanks, Merlin, for the information on Beyond Self-Interest and the particular paper in it by Virginia Held: “Mothering versus Contract.” I imagine it would be worthwhile to compare and assimilate Held’s ideas with Kathleen Touchstone’s Then Athena Said.

Oh, I see now that someone else noticed the connection to Prof. Touchstone’s book and mentioned it in a comment in your blog. Thanks for sharing the link there to Objectivity Archive. By the way, a year or two ago, Kathleen mentioned to me that she is working on another book. I don’t know the topic or the schedule.

There is a review of Kathleen Touchstone’sThen Athena Said in The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 8.2 (link). Since it is more than 5 years old, it can be read online for free with a JSTOR account, which can also be had for free.

That is the fallacy of asserting the consequent. which says if a implies b and b is asserted then a follows.

if you construct a truth table for ((a => b) & b) => a you will see the expression is not a tautology hence is not a valid inference form.

"=>" stands for implies and "&" for "and"

The algebraic logic formulated by George Boole in 1850 includes Aristotle's syllogistic as a special case. Way back when, Aristotle developed syllogistic categorical logic and the Stoics developed logic based on conditionals. The Stoic logic invented by Crysypus is mostly lost and the syllogistic logic based on categorical statements survived and was not improved upon until Leibniz attempted to reformulate logic (he was a bit ahead of his time) and George Boole and Gotleib Frege succeeded in the 19 th century. It was Boole's formulation of conditional logic what was applicable to expressing the logic of electronic computing machines.

Aristotle's syllogistic was correct as far as it went, but it could not handle binary relations well. Consider If all tigers are animals then the tail of a tiger is the tail of an animal. Or if x is the tail of a tiger then x is the tail of an animal. The binary relation x is the tail of y is no expressible in categorical form. The best one can do is all lion's tails are animal tail's therefore if x is a lion's tail then x is an animal's tail which is a conditional statement. The categorical version is all lion's tails are animal's tails. which does not follow from all lions are animals in the Aristotelian syllogistic. There is nothing wrong with Aristotle's logic but it is inflexible and somewhat constipated.

One wonders if the work of the Stoic school has survived long enough to be taken into the Islamic domains could it have migrated back into Europe in the late middle ages? The only reason that Aristotle's work even partially survived is that much of it was taken up by Islamic scholars and part of the Ulima (Muslim learning) and migrated back into Europe (the Byzantine empire) when Christian scholars when to the Muslim world to learn and thing or two. It was the Ulima that kept much of Greek thinking alive until middle ages in Europe. A great deal was lost when Julius Caesar burned down the library at Alexandria and later on the Christians burned what was not burned by Caesar.

Aristotle's syllogistic was correct as far as it went, but it could not handle binary relations well. Consider If all tigers are animals then the tail of a tiger is the tail of an animal. Or if x is the tail of a tiger then x is the tail of an animal. The binary relation x is the tail of y is no expressible in categorical form.

You sound like a broken record, and Fred Sommers' term logic handles binary (and higher) relations very well.

You sound like a broken record, and Fred Sommers' term logic handles binary (and higher) relations very well.

Sommers and Engleburtsen had to -extend- the logic. Aristotle was nowhere near what they did. And even with term logic extended, term logic yields no useful metamathematical results. Goedel could not have proved the incompleteness theorems using term logic and term logic does not lend itself well to mathematical extension. Logic stagnated until Boole and Frege made the breakthrough by going back to Stoic conditional logic.

In logic design of circuits (necessary to get minimal circuits) Sommers-Engelburtsen term logic is nowhere used. S and E were very clever and original, but their term logic does not lend itself very well to computer execution. The programming language PROLOG and others are derived from first order logic. Set theory was finally nailed down by being basted on conditional logic. Term Logic bore no mathematical fruit. First and Higher order Predicate Logic did.

Computerization of grammar and machine translation were derived logically from the extensions of predicate logic. Next time you use Google Translate be aware there is a lot of mathematically based logic behind it.

In conditional logic there is no issue of distribution.

In conditional terms "all P is Q" means if x is a P then x is Q. Asserting y is a Q does not guarantee y is a P. Suppose y is in Q - P which is to say the set of Q's which are not P's

It's written as a categorical syllogism, one that has a distribution error.

And I showed its conditional counterpart. Anything in categorical logic can be handled by conditional logic, in particular first order predicate logic. The converse, however, is not true. One of the reasons why modern predicate logic was developed was to handled binary and higher order relations flexibly.

Conditional logic was originated by the Stoics about the same time Aristotle operated his Lyceum. Crysippus, the Stoic was said to have write dozens, possibly hundreds of books on logic, but none of them have survived to this day. We only have fragmentary references to Stoic conditional logic by other writers, but the full details are lost in time. We are fortunate to have what we have of Aristotle. Some of his works were preserved by the Roman Cicero, others of his works somehow got to the Islamic domains where they become a hit and were carefully studied and expanded upon. In Europe, the study of logic mostly stagnated until the late middle ages when they returned to Europe. R. Maimonodes used Aristotle's logic to defend Judaism against Islam and a century later Thomas Acquinas used Aristotle's work to expound Catholicism.

Interesting, I went into solving #1 cold, without any further context. I got the right answer, then went on to #2 and the Wiki article. The method I used was System 1 according to the description, but when validating it I found my own answer was incorrect, then I came to the right answer, so I this was System 2 according to the description. All this took about 1 to 1.5min..

I just looked at the problem and decided (spoiler alert) saved the most fuel without doing any calculation to speak of. I think the problem is set up to trap you in what seems obvious so I went with what I thought was the un-obvious answer. I also don't think it's close or the idea is you must do several detailed calculations and that shouldn't be what the author's about. If it's thinking fast and slow I did the fast for it took about 20 seconds. Still thinking about it as I write this if it's roughly three times the gas mileage the more economical vehicle uses, so 1/3 the fuel which magnifies the savings of the 12 - 14.

Now I'll try the second. My answer was correct. For 10,000 miles driving each, 12 - 14 saved roughly 36 gals over the 30 - 40. I took a lot of time before my young teenager arithmetic came back on line, however.

## Recommended Posts

## Top Posters In This Topic

246

34

30

28

## Popular Days

Jul 7

18

Jul 5

14

Jul 6

11

Jul 19

10

## Top Posters In This Topic

merjet246 postsPeter34 postsBaalChatzaf30 postsJon Letendre28 posts## Popular Days

Jul 7 2020

18 posts

Jul 5 2020

14 posts

Jul 6 2020

11 posts

Jul 19 2017

10 posts

## Popular Posts

## Jon Letendre

Frankly I think we have entertained the irrational and fear-frozen among us for way too long. It is time to take life back. No more forced face diapers and closed schools. The frightened can

## merjet

A quip? You believe his remark was witty or clever? Gimmee a break. 😃, ye of unlimited faith in your messiah and your mind-reading. As usual, Jon is clueless, confusing a test for SARS-CoV

## Jon Letendre

" "Coronavirus" is a wider category than the types of coronavirus which produce common cold symptoms. Severe acute respiratory syndrome, which COVID-19 produces in susceptible people, is in a differe

## Posted Images

## merjet

AuthorWages and Profits

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

Author## The Nature of the Firm #1

The Nature of the Firm #2

The Nature of the Firm #3

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorThe Nature of the Firm #4

The Nature of the Firm #5

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorEconomic Man and Parenting

Mises on Homo Economicus

Contractual Bonds and Hegemonic Bonds

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## Guyau

.

Thanks, Merlin, for the information on

Beyond Self-Interestand the particular paper in it by Virginia Held: “Mothering versus Contract.” I imagine it would be worthwhile to compare and assimilate Held’s ideas with Kathleen Touchstone’sThen Athena Said.Oh, I see now that someone else noticed the connection to Prof. Touchstone’s book and mentioned it in a comment in your blog. Thanks for sharing the link there to

Objectivity Archive.By the way, a year or two ago, Kathleen mentioned to me that she is working on another book. I don’t know the topic or the schedule.## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorThere is a review of Kathleen Touchstone’s

Then Athena SaidinThe Journal of Ayn Rand Studies8.2 (link). Since it is more than 5 years old, it can be read online for free with a JSTOR account, which can also be had for free.## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## Guyau

.

Yes, and I have some remarks on

Then Athena Saidonline in the thread here.## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorConstructivist and Ecological Rationality #1

Constructivist and Ecological Rationality #2

Constructivist and Ecological Rationality #3

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## BaalChatzaf

Here is some ecological rationality for you: Never pee in the water in which you are standing. You make have to drink it some day....

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorHeh. Here is another. Never pee while wearing a poncho in gusty winds.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorConstructivist and Ecological Rationality #4

Constructivist and Ecological Rationality #5

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorCapitalism-Socialism Debate

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorLotto Probabilities

A Little Logic Puzzle

Khizr Khan

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## BaalChatzaf

pertaining to "A Little Logic Puzzle" :

That is the fallacy of asserting the consequent. which says if a implies b and b is asserted then a follows.

if you construct a truth table for ((a => b) & b) => a you will see the expression is not a tautology hence is not a valid inference form.

"=>" stands for implies and "&" for "and"

The algebraic logic formulated by George Boole in 1850 includes Aristotle's syllogistic as a special case. Way back when, Aristotle developed syllogistic categorical logic and the Stoics developed logic based on conditionals. The Stoic logic invented by Crysypus is mostly lost and the syllogistic logic based on categorical statements survived and was not improved upon until Leibniz attempted to reformulate logic (he was a bit ahead of his time) and George Boole and Gotleib Frege succeeded in the 19 th century. It was Boole's formulation of conditional logic what was applicable to expressing the logic of electronic computing machines.

Aristotle's syllogistic was correct as far as it went, but it could not handle binary relations well. Consider If all tigers are animals then the tail of a tiger is the tail of an animal. Or if x is the tail of a tiger then x is the tail of an animal. The binary relation x is the tail of y is no expressible in categorical form. The best one can do is all lion's tails are animal tail's therefore if x is a lion's tail then x is an animal's tail which is a conditional statement. The categorical version is all lion's tails are animal's tails. which does

notfollow from all lions are animals in the Aristotelian syllogistic. There is nothing wrong with Aristotle's logic but it is inflexible and somewhat constipated.One wonders if the work of the Stoic school has survived long enough to be taken into the Islamic domains could it have migrated back into Europe in the late middle ages? The only reason that Aristotle's work even partially survived is that much of it was taken up by Islamic scholars and part of the Ulima (Muslim learning) and migrated back into Europe (the Byzantine empire) when Christian scholars when to the Muslim world to learn and thing or two. It was the Ulima that kept much of Greek thinking alive until middle ages in Europe. A great deal was lost when Julius Caesar burned down the library at Alexandria and later on the Christians burned what was not burned by Caesar.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorYou sound like a broken record, and Fred Sommers' term logic handles binary (and higher) relations very well.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## BaalChatzaf

Sommers and Engleburtsen had to -extend- the logic. Aristotle was nowhere near what they did. And even with term logic extended, term logic yields no useful metamathematical results. Goedel could not have proved the incompleteness theorems using term logic and term logic does not lend itself well to mathematical extension. Logic stagnated until Boole and Frege made the breakthrough by going back to Stoic conditional logic.

In logic design of circuits (necessary to get minimal circuits) Sommers-Engelburtsen term logic is nowhere used. S and E were very clever and original, but their term logic does not lend itself very well to computer execution. The programming language PROLOG and others are derived from first order logic. Set theory was finally nailed down by being basted on conditional logic. Term Logic bore no mathematical fruit. First and Higher order Predicate Logic did.

Computerization of grammar and machine translation were derived logically from the extensions of predicate logic. Next time you use Google Translate be aware there is a lot of mathematically based logic behind it.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## KorbenDallas

Ba'al, the error is a distribution error.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## BaalChatzaf

In conditional logic there is no issue of distribution.

In conditional terms "all P is Q" means if x is a P then x is Q. Asserting y is a Q does not guarantee y is a P. Suppose y is in Q - P which is to say the set of Q's which are not P's

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## KorbenDallas

It's written as a categorical syllogism, one that has a distribution error.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## BaalChatzaf

And I showed its conditional counterpart. Anything in categorical logic can be handled by conditional logic, in particular first order predicate logic. The converse, however, is not true. One of the reasons why modern predicate logic was developed was to handled binary and higher order relations flexibly.

Conditional logic was originated by the Stoics about the same time Aristotle operated his Lyceum. Crysippus, the Stoic was said to have write dozens, possibly hundreds of books on logic, but none of them have survived to this day. We only have fragmentary references to Stoic conditional logic by other writers, but the full details are lost in time. We are fortunate to have what we have of Aristotle. Some of his works were preserved by the Roman Cicero, others of his works somehow got to the Islamic domains where they become a hit and were carefully studied and expanded upon. In Europe, the study of logic mostly stagnated until the late middle ages when they returned to Europe. R. Maimonodes used Aristotle's logic to defend Judaism against Islam and a century later Thomas Acquinas used Aristotle's work to expound Catholicism.

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorObama, friend of Islam

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## merjet

AuthorThinking, Fast and Slow #1

Thinking, Fast and Slow #2

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## KorbenDallas

Interesting, I went into solving #1 cold, without any further context. I got the right answer, then went on to #2 and the Wiki article. The method I used was System 1 according to the description, but when validating it I found my own answer was incorrect, then I came to the right answer, so I this was System 2 according to the description. All this took about 1 to 1.5min..

(Pats Self on back )

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## Brant Gaede

## Link to comment

## Share on other sites

## Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

## Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account## Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now