[FOM] Why inclusive disjunction?

[mhebert]

> Can anyone provide a principled reason for why logicians choose to
> interpret "or" as inclusive disjunction?
> 
Is it simply because (modern) logic was designed by mathematicians, and the inclusive or is more standard (or somehow more natural?) in mathematics, like in "a smaller or equal to b", and in the "union" (which includes the intersection)?
(But then, why would it be more "natural" in mathematics?)
Michel Hebert



 
Fromfom-bounces at cs.nyu.edu

To"Foundations of Mathematics" fom at cs.nyu.edu

Cc

DateTue, 9 Jan 2007 22:38:30 -0600 (Central Standard Time)

Subject[FOM] Why inclusive disjunction?

  

> 
> I am preparing to teach a course in `proof'.
> 
> Can anyone provide a principled reason for why logicians choose to
> interpret "or" as inclusive disjunction?
> 
> I understand that in the interpretations of statutes, the exclusive or
> is the default. So attorney's have made a different choice of 
> `formalization'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John T. Baldwin
> Director, Office of Mathematics Education
> Department of Mathematics, Statistics, 
> and Computer Science M/C 249
> jbaldwin at uic.edu
> 312-413-2149
> Room 327 Science and Engineering Offices (SEO)
> 851 S. Morgan
> Chicago, IL 60607
> 
> Assistant to the director
> Jan Nekola: 312-413-3750
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> http://www.cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/fom/attachments/20070110/22db3562/attachment-0001.html