TED Conversations

Justin Elkin

This conversation is closed.

Does deductive abstraction make sense?

Here is a link to a pdf on linking deductive and abstract argument systems.
This seems to me that much progress can be made by most in many debates if both sides of the question employed such.

  • thumb
    Sep 4 2012: Is your question whether this would be the most productive way for a diverse group of humans to examine issues and conduct arguments (by using symbolic propositional logic)?

    Or are you asking whether deductive logic is useful in debate?

    My response is that logic belongs in debate but that real situations are much too complex to be represented with a propositional calculus, that using symbolic systems of this kind unnecessarily excludes people from participation in solving problems, and that for situations of great complexity we do already use modeling tools to abstract from reality to achieve better understandings of causes and effects. That is what systems modeling is, but it is not the sort of system of representation in the article you linked.
    • thumb
      Sep 4 2012: Your response certainly clears some of the air for me. Thanks.
  • thumb
    Sep 4 2012: This is way over my willingness to read. I gave up at:
    "We say X1 ⊆ A() and
    X2 ⊆ A() are logically equivalent (written: X1 ≈∼ X2)
    iff there exists a bijection f : X1 → X2 such that ∀ ∈ X1,
    we have ≈ f ( ).

    I wonder if researchers could be rewarded points for explaining things to a 5th grader, so that we can all benefit from their hard work.