Hi Patrick. I admire that you have taken the initiative to make these videos. I was overwhelmed emotionally in comparison to my small understanding of what "logic" is, which made me give more attention to you and felt great to have absorbed your insights. I would be continuing to the next lesson on Semantics for today. I am currently in my MSc. Mathematics program at Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Coimbatore, and working on building my fundamentals. I see your last video was 7months ago; hope you can restart making videos again; its okay for me that you make a video every 2-3 weeks, because you rightly found out that some "core parts" of this subject can be take for granted elsewhere or not even looked at, which I feel is a crime against education, to withhold deep insights that can have an expansive impact on somebody else. Thank you for this video, once again though.
Hi Kevin, thank you very much for your kind words. I'm very glad this has helped you. Like you, I always found that having a firm grasp of the fundamentals really helped my understanding, and that's what I was going for all along with this series. Although I would love to make more videos at some point, my job is currently keeping me busy! All the best with your studies!
Hey love your channel and may I ask a question: If in set theory, I can create a relation which takes a set of elements which are propositions (like set a is a subset of set b) and map it to a set of elements containing “true” and “false”, then why is it said that set theory itself can’t make truth valuations? I ask this because somebody told me recently that “set theory cannot make true valuations” Is this because I cannot do what I say above? Or because truth valuations happen via deductive systems and not by say first order set theory ?
Hello Patrick,
I found your videos so deep, clear and useful.
It helps me a lot to learn about logic.
Thank you
Thanks! I'm glad to hear you found them so useful
Hi Patrick. I admire that you have taken the initiative to make these videos. I was overwhelmed emotionally in comparison to my small understanding of what "logic" is, which made me give more attention to you and felt great to have absorbed your insights. I would be continuing to the next lesson on Semantics for today. I am currently in my MSc. Mathematics program at Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Coimbatore, and working on building my fundamentals. I see your last video was 7months ago; hope you can restart making videos again; its okay for me that you make a video every 2-3 weeks, because you rightly found out that some "core parts" of this subject can be take for granted elsewhere or not even looked at, which I feel is a crime against education, to withhold deep insights that can have an expansive impact on somebody else. Thank you for this video, once again though.
Hi Kevin, thank you very much for your kind words. I'm very glad this has helped you. Like you, I always found that having a firm grasp of the fundamentals really helped my understanding, and that's what I was going for all along with this series. Although I would love to make more videos at some point, my job is currently keeping me busy! All the best with your studies!
Hey love your channel and may I ask a question:
If in set theory, I can create a relation which takes a set of elements which are propositions (like set a is a subset of set b) and map it to a set of elements containing “true” and “false”, then why is it said that set theory itself can’t make truth valuations?
I ask this because somebody told me recently that “set theory cannot make true valuations” Is this because I cannot do what I say above? Or because truth valuations happen via deductive systems and not by say first order set theory ?
Hi Patrick
I think you will find that this can be done in Haskell using Monads
:o