Is logic math or philosophy?
What difference would it make if logic was either of the two?
>>16807246the logical answer is: both
>>16807246>>16807254>>16807261In philosophy, logic is the study of reasoning, encompassing both formal systems (like propositional logic) and informal arguments in natural language, focusing on valid inference, the nature of truth, and normative principles, often extending to metaphysical questions like modality. In mathematics, logic is a formal tool for constructing and verifying proofs within rigorous, symbolic systems (e.g., first-order logic, set theory), prioritizing consistency and provability over broader conceptual debates. While both fields share classical logic, philosophy explores reasoning's broader implications, including non-classical logics, whereas mathematics uses logic to ensure the correctness of formal systems, making the former more expansive and the latter more focused and technical.
>>16807262the funny thing about Math is that it depends on axioms, but nobody ever proved the axioms to be true (because nobody can. they are not true, unless you want to limit your Consciousness in that way)
>>16807246>which of these two options?Clearly you don't understand Venn Diagrams.
>>16807246Whatever it is, it’s definitely not /lit/ lmao
>>16807344Is it more fundamental than math? Is it the purest subject? Is it the most fundamental aspect of reality?
>>16807246Math and philosophy are downstream from logic. This is like asking if math is algrebra or geometry.
>>16807246Math is logic. The better question is what can logic actually benefit philosophy..
>>16807263>they are not trueanon, you dumbass, axioms are by definition true in a formal theory>UnLeSS yOu wAnT tO lImIt YoUr CoNsCiOuSnEsSlmao
>>16807262holy fucking shit I do not care about your blog, answer the fucking question
math is an extension of logic, logic is the deshittification of philosophy
logic is a formal science, and so is math.metalogic is philosophy.
>>16807487>what can logic actually benefit philosophy..Logical self-consistency is the first bar one must pass with any philosophical argument. All of philosophy is:>take axiom>apply until logical conclusion>rub a bunch of edge cases against it until cracks start to form
>>16807541Don't kill yourself when you read Bertrand Russel. It's only like 100 years old.
>>16807542>Bertrand RusselHave. What's your retardation about him?
>>16807261No, since math is arithmetic logic, it would be illogical circular definition to define logic as a subset of math when math is already defined as a type of logic.
>>16807263>nobody ever proved the axioms to be true*to a senseless robot that can't actually empirically experience the basis of the axiom
>>16807475No, philosophy is upstream from logic, philosophy doesn't have to be entirely logical, just look at marxism.
>>16807528>logic is a formal science, and so is math.>metalogic is philosophy.Yet your highest formal recognition for logic, science, and math is the doctorate of philosophy.
>>16807246Bags of sand.
>>16807552>philosotard>unironically uses a tradition as an argument
>>16807246philosophy is for retards, math is not, BIG difference
>>16807611Its all tradition, though, whether something is philosophy vs math vs logic is just semantic tradition, it the end its just apes grunting.
Logic>Math>Physics>Chemistry>Astronomy>Geology>Biology>Anthropology>Psychology>Linguistics
>>16807246read kenneth kunen's set theory
Logic is obviously philosophy. Math was separated from logic since the very beginning. It was only through autistic western hamfisting the two were brought together, only to prove mathematics is fundamentally fucked as a system of logic (godel). But that shouldn't stop you from pursuing math. It's actually freeing to be working in a paradoxical system.
>>16807541there is a flaw to that logic friend, supposed through logical deduction, you conclude that logic is not enough to reach the proper conclusion. Such as with quantum physics where deterministic properties are entirely eliminated and we can only go on probability, what then?
>>16808202You're attempting to use logic to demonstrate the insufficiency of logic. I'll take that as a win.
>>16808210hehehe exactly, its such a fun thing to run into
>Is logic math or philosophy?Logic is a field of philosophy (basically everything is). Math is a field of logic.
>>16807552>doctorate of philosophy.have you heard of the concept of tradition?
>>16808197>only to prove mathematics is fundamentally fucked as a system of logic (godel).<always being able to add an axiom to your system is a flawlol, lmao
>>16808401Are you conceding that yes, traditionally logic and math are offshoots of philosophy?
>>16808466do you care about what's true or about some tradition from thousands of years ago?
>>16808468Yes, so explaining why you apparently think the tradition that has stood for thousands of years is actually provably not true would also be helpful.
>>16808484A tradition only proves something has been considered true, not that it's true
>>16808486Ok, so you don't actually care about the truth or the tradition, you just want to rebel against the tradition without being able to explain yourself?
>>16808490If something is true it has to be proven true. A tradition proves nothing true
>>16808507Then why are you so much more concerned with identifying tradition than truth?
>>16808510You brought up the whole "guess what the P in PhD stands for" bullshit
>>16808349math is definitely NOT a field of logic. Gödel proved that shit (logicism, formalism) is wrong
>>16808519Yes and you deferred purely to some semantic attack based on your own traditions of rebelling against the establishment instead of proving any truth or showing that the traditionally accepted truths are proven falsehoods, proving that in practice you actual value your own traditions over any truth.
>>16808523>math is definitely NOT a field of logic.Sure, math is called arithmetic logic for other reasons entirely.
>>16808526>your own traditions of rebelling against the establishmentyou claim without proof that I'm following a tradition>traditionally accepted truthsyou haven't proven the tradition is accepted
>>16808560>you claim without proof that I'm following a traditionNo, rebelling against the establishment clearly falls under the traditions of anti-authoritarianism, cynicism, and a number of other philosophical traditions.>you haven't proven the tradition is acceptedBut we both know it is traditionally accepted, you have already conceded the point, so the onus is on you to disprove the traditionally accepted truths unless you don't actually care about the truth and just resent tradition itself.
>>16808562>rebelling against the establishment clearly falls under the traditions of anti-authoritarianism, cynicism, and a number of other philosophical traditionsthis does not mean I'm following any of said traditions>But we both know it is traditionally acceptedWe know that when you graduate you are given the title of PhD. What you didn't prove is that the majority of people giving and receiving this title actually care about the "philosophy" part or its history.
>>16808565>this does not mean I'm following any of said traditionsYes it does, if those are the acts of the tradition and you are demonstrably following them, it means you are following the tradition, whether intentionally or not.>What you didn't prove is that the majority of people giving and receiving this title actually care about the "philosophy" part or its history.So you can't prove that the authority figures decided to arbitrarily put the title on there for no reason other than not caring and just finding it funny or something, but you think you have disproved the tradition simply by maintaining ignorance of the reasoning?
>>16807246>>16807254>>16807261>>16807262Reminder Math is an extension of Logic and Logic is an extension of philosophy. OP is retarded. The foundation of any good math education (which most of you retards don't have, especially OP) begins with philosophy classes.
>>16809358>Math is an extension patently false
>>16809361Nope, philosophy is the discipline of thinking, logic is thinking condensed to some well reasoned internally consistent structure, and math is thinking put to some well reasoned internally consistent structure revolving around value/quantity/scale.
>>16809413>philosophy is the discipline of thinkingwrongphilosophy is the discipline of brainlets "thinking"factual
>>16809413if you think maths follows from logic you have never studied maths