The problem with borrowing words from natural language (like "and", "or", "if") to define entities of formal logic, is that there is nothing to prevent the words from being used in their original natural sense, in the middle of what is supposed to be a formal argument.
The reason this is not actually a problem is because the formal definitions are close to being correct and a good duplication of the natural word usages. I think it is possible to define an exact duplication of the natural word usage - so that we do not need to worry about that any more.
No comments:
Post a Comment