At the edge of logic

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Moderator: Only_Humean

Forum rules
Forum Philosophy

At the edge of logic

Postby Brando » Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:14 am

Logic is discussed in this Forum in a canonical way: Argument, truth tables, conditionals etc. . I want deliver a more excentric way to see logic:
a) first, what is logic to the law of the excluded third following Gotthard Günther?
b) logic seems to be an abstraction: If I say the for Loop and the while are equivalent, you can state, although you do not know what this is, the Logical description: from a for Loop follows a while.
c) Husserl sets the genealogic way of speeking of logic: so the given in experience allows a Standard of fulfillment which is a prerequisite to Logical sentences
d) what about marking in Spencer-Brown

What relation have this observations to logic, as we know it conventionaly?
Brando
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:39 am

Re: At the edge of logic

Postby Only_Humean » Mon Sep 18, 2017 10:00 am

Without more details, this looks like it could be a request to do your homework for you.

Please deliver a way to see logic: what issues do you feel Günther raises? And what about marking in Spencer-Brown?

Also, welcome! :)
Image

The biology of purpose keeps my nose above the surface.
- Brian Eno
User avatar
Only_Humean
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6182
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Right here

Re: At the edge of logic

Postby Brando » Mon Sep 18, 2017 11:28 am

Günther's work was based upon Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Martin Heidegger and Oswald Spengler. He developed a trans-Aristotelian logical approach (omitting the tertium non datur). Günther's transclassical logic was the attempt to combine improved results of modern dialectic with formal logic. His focus on the philosophical problem of the "Du" ("You"/"Thou") was trailblazing
From Wikipedia. For Spencer Brown see the entry in Laws of Form in the Wikipedia. I am not writing a work on it. I just read Luhmann, and there this concepts are mentioned but in a sociological context. So reentry of Laws of Form is exemplified by the quest of ecology of an Enterprise after the distinction System and Environment. But I am not sure if I understand it mathematically! So this post is just a try, perhaps somebody does understand this concepts. Günther is present in Luhmann as a logic of polycontextualities: A value is not just restricted to one branch, but to many with different expressional value.
Brando
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:39 am

Re: At the edge of logic

Postby Arminius » Wed Sep 20, 2017 1:34 am

Brando wrote:Logic is discussed in this Forum in a canonical way: Argument, truth tables, conditionals etc. . I want deliver a more excentric way to see logic:
a) first, what is logic to the law of the excluded third following Gotthard Günther?
b) logic seems to be an abstraction: If I say the for Loop and the while are equivalent, you can state, although you do not know what this is, the Logical description: from a for Loop follows a while.
c) Husserl sets the genealogic way of speeking of logic: so the given in experience allows a Standard of fulfillment which is a prerequisite to Logical sentences
d) what about marking in Spencer-Brown

What relation have this observations to logic, as we know it conventionaly?
Brando wrote:
Günther's work was based upon Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Martin Heidegger and Oswald Spengler. He developed a trans-Aristotelian logical approach (omitting the tertium non datur). Günther's transclassical logic was the attempt to combine improved results of modern dialectic with formal logic. His focus on the philosophical problem of the "Du" ("You"/"Thou") was trailblazing
From Wikipedia. For Spencer Brown see the entry in Laws of Form in the Wikipedia. I am not writing a work on it. I just read Luhmann, and there this concepts are mentioned but in a sociological context. So reentry of Laws of Form is exemplified by the quest of ecology of an Enterprise after the distinction System and Environment. But I am not sure if I understand it mathematically! So this post is just a try, perhaps somebody does understand this concepts. Günther is present in Luhmann as a logic of polycontextualities: A value is not just restricted to one branch, but to many with different expressional value.

Peter Sloterdijk and Norbert Bolz have not seldom written about Gotthard Günther (1900-1984) and even oftener about Niklas Luhmann (1927-1998). As far as I remember this has often had to do with Günther's concept of "Rejektion" (also: "Rejektionsfunktion", "Rejektionswert") and with Luhmann's concept of "Kommunikation" and of "Zwangskonsensualismus".

Als ein Beispiel (as an example):

Zu Habermas' aussichtsloser Position vgl. Gotthard Günther, Beiträge zur Grundlegung einer operationsfähigen Dialektik, 2. Band, 1979, S. 169: „Habermas steht in einer ehrwürdigen, aber unwiderruflich dem Verfall preisgegebenen Tradition, die nur dort ihr Leben fristet, wo sie mit längst veralteten Denkweisen arbeiten kann.“ Peter Sloterdijk meint, daß ein solcher Prozeß eine Falle ist, „in die der solchermaßen verflüssigte Heilige Geist nicht nicht gehen kann. Er geruht jedesmal, im Ergebnis eines Prozesses zu wehen, ganz so, als wehte er nicht länger, wo er will, sondern wo das Verfahren es erlaubt“. Außerdem, so folgert Sloterdijk, garantiere der prozedurale Filter ja, daß „keine Scheinheiligen auftreten und uns diabolische Simulakren erspart bleiben, genauso wie man bei Kommunikationen gemäß Habermas’schen Spielregeln die Gewißheit genießen darf, daß nach der Endausscheidung kein Dissenstheoretiker, kein Pluralist, kein Konstruktivist und vor allem kein Künstler im Kreis der wahrhaft vernünftig Kommunizierenden mehr dabei sein kann.“ (Vgl. Peter Sloterdijk, Nicht gerettet, 2001, S. 86 und 87). An dieser Stelle verweist Sloterdijk auf Luhmann und seine Kritik an der Kritischen Theorie und ihrem unvermeidlichen „Zwangskonsensualismus“. (Vgl. Niklas Luhmann, Ich sehe was, was du nicht siehst, in: ders., Soziologische Aufklärung - Konstruktivistische Perspektiven, 1993, S. 228-234). Schon lange vor der „Sloterdijk-Debatte“ genannten „Habermas-Debatte“ war klar: „Die Kritische Theorie ist tot“. (Peter Sloterdijk, in: Die Zeit, 09.09.1999, S. 35

Because I am much interested in the history of machines, I thankfully can say that Gotthard Günther also wrote: "Das Bewußtsein der Maschinen", 1960 ("The Consciousness of Machines", 1960).
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis


Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]