Re: Must higher-order logic be typed?
- From: "Owen" <owenholden@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Aug 2006 12:47:37 -0700
Newberry wrote:
However, if you ask "what is a higher order logic?" then one reasonable
answer to that might be "a logic in which it is possible to quantify
over sets or functions or predicates (not just over individuals)" and
there are many logical systems in which this can be done but which are
not typed (though they are not normally called higher order logics).
The best known is set theory
This is what confuses me. Is set theory a multi-order logic done in a
first order logic?
Often that is the case. See: Quine.
.
- References:
- Must higher-order logic be typed?
- From: yuyang08
- Re: Must higher-order logic be typed?
- From: xilog
- Re: Must higher-order logic be typed?
- From: Newberry
- Must higher-order logic be typed?
- Prev by Date: Any First Order or Set Theoretic versions of Fitch Operators?
- Next by Date: Re: Every set x equinumerous with a set y disjoint from x?
- Previous by thread: Re: Must higher-order logic be typed?
- Next by thread: Any First Order or Set Theoretic versions of Fitch Operators?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
