Why we need such a restrictions in logics?
Note:I am not competent is logic so this question may look weird to you.
So as I know there are different types of logics (first-order logic, second-order...), and the difference between them is that each next order logic can quantify over bigger set of objects, and now the question which I have is, why we need such a restriction? Why we can't make logic where we could quantify over all objects? My intuition suggests me that this would bring some paradoxes, is it the real reason, if so is it the only one? If it's not, what is the reason for such restrictions in every logic?
Thanks in advance.
logic philosophy
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
|
show 12 more comments
Note:I am not competent is logic so this question may look weird to you.
So as I know there are different types of logics (first-order logic, second-order...), and the difference between them is that each next order logic can quantify over bigger set of objects, and now the question which I have is, why we need such a restriction? Why we can't make logic where we could quantify over all objects? My intuition suggests me that this would bring some paradoxes, is it the real reason, if so is it the only one? If it's not, what is the reason for such restrictions in every logic?
Thanks in advance.
logic philosophy
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40
|
show 12 more comments
Note:I am not competent is logic so this question may look weird to you.
So as I know there are different types of logics (first-order logic, second-order...), and the difference between them is that each next order logic can quantify over bigger set of objects, and now the question which I have is, why we need such a restriction? Why we can't make logic where we could quantify over all objects? My intuition suggests me that this would bring some paradoxes, is it the real reason, if so is it the only one? If it's not, what is the reason for such restrictions in every logic?
Thanks in advance.
logic philosophy
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
Note:I am not competent is logic so this question may look weird to you.
So as I know there are different types of logics (first-order logic, second-order...), and the difference between them is that each next order logic can quantify over bigger set of objects, and now the question which I have is, why we need such a restriction? Why we can't make logic where we could quantify over all objects? My intuition suggests me that this would bring some paradoxes, is it the real reason, if so is it the only one? If it's not, what is the reason for such restrictions in every logic?
Thanks in advance.
logic philosophy
logic philosophy
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
asked Dec 2 '18 at 13:47
Юрій Ярош
1,049614
1,049614
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40
|
show 12 more comments
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40
|
show 12 more comments
0
active
oldest
votes
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3022658%2fwhy-we-need-such-a-restrictions-in-logics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
0
active
oldest
votes
0
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3022658%2fwhy-we-need-such-a-restrictions-in-logics%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
The first full version of predicate logic (see Frege) was "high-order" (also if second-order was sufficient for Frege's project). The basic divide is between FOL, which has some very "nice" properties and Second-order and Higher-order Logic.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 13:51
But is not "quantify over bigger set of objects" but on higher types of objects : FOL quantifies over individual objects only; SOL quantifies also on properties of indivuduals; TOL over properties of properties of individuals; and so on. See also Type Theories.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:06
See Melvin Fitting, Types Tableaus and Gödel’s God, Kluwer (2002) for a modern treatment.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:08
@MauroALLEGRANZA Then I formulated it in the wrong way, but the question still arises, what is the reason for such restriction?
– Юрій Ярош
Dec 2 '18 at 14:27
What "restrictions" ? If you want to use Higher-order logic with quantification on properties of every order, you can use it.
– Mauro ALLEGRANZA
Dec 2 '18 at 14:40