I’m already so done with this course.

My textbook:

p: “The weather is bad.”

Exercise:

Represent “the weather is good” using logical symbols.

Me: How am I supposed to answer that? You didn’t give me a letter for that. I guess I’ll use q?

Expected answer: ~p

THIS IS LITERALLY THE CLASS ABOUT LOGIC DHDJFBDHDJDHDHDH

Who let neurotypicals write a logic textbook istg

  • gandalf_der_12te
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    well, yeah

    what seems interesting to me is that these “impossible” mathematical objects typically have the property of being self-contradictory. That means, they include statements that contradict each other. Much like a human mind might contain desires that contradict one another. That’s what makes this point so fascinating to me:

    Typically, in maths, we assume that objects are eternal. If you have an object, like the exponential function, it’s always the same function, no matter when you refer to it. But in reality, things change. I find it utterly fascinating to model such things as well.

    • SuperNovaStarOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      That’s an interesting way of looking at things. It is telling that our best models of reality so far are wildly different from each other and mutually exclusive