Yup, this is what I was looking for. I know this playlist is old, but it’s great.
@alannacronk30103 жыл бұрын
I've done Aristotelian, first order, set theory, and modal logic like broke my brain. someone on Reddit suggested I watch this video and I'm so happy I did. you really made my life a lot less stressful ty.
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Thanks! (And thanks Reddit!) To me, modal makes a lot more sense than first-order. You can do so much of it just by drawing nice diagrams!
@MajestyofReason3 жыл бұрын
Loved the video! Modal logic is by far the best.
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Yes, modal logic is great! More coming soon.
@theMelMxshow3 жыл бұрын
Thank you! Always on time for a subject I'm reviewing!
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Any time!
@Bunnokazooie3 жыл бұрын
Hi Dr. Jago, thank you so much for starting this series on modal logic - something I've wanted to learn for a long time. I just wanted to say that the font was a little bit too small to see in my phone. (And a little too cursive). Nevertheless I eagerly anticipate the next video in the series!
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Glad you like them! Do you mean my handwriting? Yes good point, I'll try to make it bigger in future videos
@ravenecho24102 жыл бұрын
okie this is actually super cool, this is much more like kants thing on reasoning, always felt a huge gulf between logic and my experience, this is definitely tightening up like to like "reality"
@ravenecho24102 жыл бұрын
okie cool i think diamond q does follow: D: ◻ p → ◊ p 5: ◊ p → ◻ ◊ p q v q => (q -> q) V q => q, tho in the world the context is different. not sure we can evaluate like that
@ravenecho24102 жыл бұрын
i'm a little confused on how implication exists for the world, are we moving states? ie for world S5, obviously the other "states" which exist all have q as true, which implies w(5) -> [ ] q given arrow is like travel to, but would we not just simplify q V q as q? i'm also confused if q means (for some propositions in this world this is true and for some it's false) or if it means (all available states of movement have the quantification of the state q as being less than or equal to true : [ ] q -> q) please continue your series :)
@deepaks.m.6709 Жыл бұрын
This is amazing! You made learning it fun :)
@AtticPhilosophy Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@djiajude95762 жыл бұрын
Super clear
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@jlcarrera96702 жыл бұрын
Thank you for your help. Greetings from Ecuador
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
You’re welcome!
@cristhianoduarte83203 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the amazing introduction. Short and straight to the point. I come from a different field (foundations of quantum mechanics), and what's driven me to modal logic was Aumann's theorem about "agreeing to disagree". We are here struggling to write up a meaningful version of Aumann's result in the quantum world, and we noticed that what matters there is the "logic" (in a very loose sense now) behind the argument. One thing led to another, and here I am, commenting on your (excellent) video. I got a question, though. Suppose you run and go through all the possible truth values of all possible propositions given a particular graph. Isn't possible to define a propositional logic having just "one world" and as propositions, say, objects like p(s_1) such that (i) you know their truth value and (ii) all the possible modal modifications are now pre-codified in/are part of the propositions? Sorry for the silly question, but I am learning on the fly. Cheers, C.
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Thanks Cristhiano! What you're doing sounds really interesting. Not quite sure I get your question. In modal logic, with just one world, there are basically two options: (i) it has a loop to itself or (ii) it doesn't (so no arrows). In (i), each sentence A is materially equivalent to []A and A (ie they have the same truth value in that model). In (ii), A is always false and []A always true. So in one-world models, the [] and don't really do much!
@cristhianoduarte83203 жыл бұрын
Thank you for giving my question a go. Very much appreciated. Let me try to make my question a bit more precise. Let me start with an example from category theory: forgetful functors basically strips away any underlying structure and takes you back to ordinary set theory. Another example, the set of integers and the set of rational numbers are nothing but the same, as there's a bijection between them. Forgetful functors are too radical, and sets of numbers are too poor structurally-wise, but I wonder if it's possible to fit modal logic within propositional logic while preserving its structure. If the question is still too cloudy, nevermind - sometimes I miss the good and old whiteboard interaction.
@philosophopotamus2 жыл бұрын
This is wonderful! Is there a playlist that goes deeper into possible worlds theories?
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
Thanks! There’s this one, have a look at the videos on QML & existence: kzfaq.info/sun/PLwSlKSRwxX0qXTZKnIT7l4_YAIWpJcZJ9 I haven’t done anything on the metaphysics of possible worlds yet.
@philosophopotamus2 жыл бұрын
@@AtticPhilosophy Thank you!
@JohnnyTwoFingers10 ай бұрын
Wow what a great video!!
@AtticPhilosophy9 ай бұрын
Thanks!
@MrGamerFann3 жыл бұрын
I was wondering if you could do a video on Epistemic and Doxastic Logic? I've got a test in 2 days and I'm still struggling.. Great video btw!
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Sure, I love epistemic logic! Won't be in time for your test tho .. good luck!
@konstantinosbabalis16952 жыл бұрын
@@AtticPhilosophy please do some epistemic logic ! Perhaps relate it to Game Theory? Thanks for your videos :)
@user-wl2rb3rh5c Жыл бұрын
How did the test go? :)
@gordonfelesina3170 Жыл бұрын
Great vid!
@AtticPhilosophy Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@Perichoresis7772 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
You’re welcome!
@yourfutureself33922 жыл бұрын
Good vid
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@johngibson48826 күн бұрын
So, just to clarify, modal logic is inductive?
@AtticPhilosophy5 күн бұрын
No, deductive. Good modal arguments preserve truth (at a world).
@qschroed2 жыл бұрын
Does the graph formed by this necessarily need to be connected? All the examples in the videos seemed to have that property?
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
No, any directed graphic is good. But unconnected areas of a graph make no difference, because box and diamond can take you only to connected states.
@funkysagancat32953 жыл бұрын
really cool
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@ilseruys91892 жыл бұрын
At 12:19, wouldn't diamond P also be true since there IS in fact a world it can see where P?
@AtticPhilosophy2 жыл бұрын
That’s right, you’ve got it!
@jean-pierredevent9703 жыл бұрын
I have to think, hearing him, about Eric Idle from Monty Python. It's a certain British accent and not unpleasant at all. For the rest, it's too difficult for me although I notice some resemblance with Feynman diagrams, which I understand neither.
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Always look on the bright side of life.
@dantoinelevert889211 ай бұрын
can I learn modal logic without background in basic logic ?
@AtticPhilosophy11 ай бұрын
Modal logic builds on truth-functional (aka propositional) logic, so it’s best to learn that first. But you don’t strictly need first-order logic to understand modal logic, and in fact, some courses teach modal before first-order logic.
@dantoinelevert889211 ай бұрын
@@AtticPhilosophy Yeah, I currently have an elective called Modal Logic but I have not taken Propositional Logic before lol
@funkysagancat32953 жыл бұрын
13:23 could it be an exclusive or?
@AtticPhilosophy3 жыл бұрын
Always inclusive 'or' (unless it explicitly says otherwise)
@Nicoder6884 Жыл бұрын
I know you aren't a fan of deontic logic, and I'm not really one either, but I feel like you should have at least given it a passing mention when you talked about the different modalities.
@alannacronk30103 жыл бұрын
first order logic>>>>>>
@funkysagancat32953 жыл бұрын
you resemble daniel radcliffe
@funkysagancat32953 жыл бұрын
probably just cuz you're an white young british adult
@centauriigaming76986 ай бұрын
This is horrible, you didnt explain stuff, you told us the things that you know about modal logic and how can you give examples about types of modal logic.