The first purpose of this series of articles is to introduce case studies on how current AI models can be used in the development of a possible theory of quantum gravity, their limitations, and the role the researcher has in steering the development in the right direction, even highlighting the errors, weaknesses and strengths of the whole process. -/- The second is to introduce the new Presentist Fragmentalist ontology as a framework and use it for developing theories of quantum gravity (...) and speculate on achieving a TOE. We emphasize it is necessary for the researcher to check everything in these articles for themselves. While there are many good ideas in this series of papers, the AI is known to make even arithmetic and algebraic mistakes. -/- To select just five apparently good ideas, there is a causal interaction tensor Cαβγδ(F1, F2) that encodes the causal relationship and the strength of the (possibly non-local) interaction between two fragments of reality (formed by each quantum system). There is a quantitative prediction for a testable table-top experiment. There is an explanation of how spacetime emerges from the fragments and their interactions. There is an explicit account of the double-slit experiment. And there is an explanation how this theory accommodates dark matter and dark energy simultaneously. -/- We explore ideas, equations they lead to, concrete calculations, and give corrections along the way. While these are generally morally right within this framework they must be checked by the researcher. Given this caveat, we believe we have made significant progress with the PF interpretation in developing a theory of quantum gravity and pointing out a possible path to a TOE. (shrink)

General Introduction to the PF interpretation of QM and quantum gravity Merriam, P., Habeeb, MAZ The first purpose of this series of articles is to introduce case studies on how current AI models can be used in the development of a possible theory of quantum gravity, their limitations, and the role the researcher has in steering the development in the right direction, even highlighting the errors, weaknesses and strengths of the whole process. The second is to introduce the new Presentist (...) Fragmentalist ontology as a framework and use it for developing theories of quantum gravity and speculate on achieving a TOE. We emphasize it is necessary for the researcher to check everything in these articles for themselves. While there are many good ideas in this series of papers, the AI is known to make even arithmetic and algebraic mistakes. To select just five apparently good ideas, there is a causal interaction tensor Cαβγδ(F1, F2) that encodes the causal relationship and the strength of the (possibly non-local) interaction between two fragments of reality (formed by each quantum system). There is a quantitative prediction for a testable table-top experiment. There is an explanation of how spacetime emerges from the fragments and their interactions. There is an explicit account of the double-slit experiment. And there is an explanation how this theory accommodates dark matter and dark energy simultaneously. We explore ideas, equations they lead to, concrete calculations, and give corrections along the way. While these are generally morally right within this framework they must be checked by the researcher. Given this caveat, we believe we have made significant progress with the PF interpretation in developing a theory of quantum gravity and pointing out a possible path to a TOE. (shrink)

Continuing his series of books on the mathematics of gambling, the author shows how a simple-rule game such as roulette is suited to a complex mathematical model whose applications generate improved betting systems that take into account a player's personal playing criteria. The book is both practical and theoretical, but is mainly devoted to the application of theory. About two-thirds of the content is lists of categories and sub-categories of improved betting systems, along with all the parameters that might stand (...) as the main objective criteria in a personal strategy - odds, profits and losses. The work contains new and original material not published before. The mathematical chapter describes complex bets, the profit function, the equivalence between bets and all their properties. All theoretical results are accompanied by suggestive concrete examples and can be followed by anyone with a minimal mathematical background because they involve only basic algebraic skills and set theory basics. The reader may also choose to skip the math and go directly to the sections containing applications, where he or she can pick desired numerical results from tables. The book offers no new so-called winning strategies, although it discusses them from a mathematical point of view. It does, however, offer improved betting systems and helps to organize a player's choices in roulette betting, according to mathematical facts and personal strategies. It is a must-have roulette handbook to be studied before placing your bets on the turn of either a European or American roulette wheel. (shrink)

This article introduces the notion of duplex elements of the finite rings and corresponding neutrosophic rings. The authors establish duplex ring Dup(R) and neutrosophic duplex ring Dup(R)I)) by way of various illustrations. The tables of different duplicities are constructed to reveal the comparison between rings Dup(Zn), Dup(Dup(Zn)) and Dup(Dup(Dup(Zn ))) for the cyclic ring Zn . The proposed duplicity structures have several algebraic systems with dissimilar consequences. Author’s characterize finite rings with R + R is different from the duplex ring (...) Dup(R). However, this characterization supports that R + R = Dup(R) for some well known rings, namely zero rings and finite fields. (shrink)

The study’s goal was to provide an educational intervention in Algebra through GeoGebra that would boost students’ confidence, improve their learning, and correct their most minor mastered skills, allowing them to improve their Algebra performance. The research design was quasi-experimental, with 40 nonrandomly chosen participants comprising the GeoGebra and control groups. Mean and standard deviation was employed to describe the algebra performance and confidence of the respondents. At the same time, independent and dependent t-tests were used to determine the students’ (...) significant difference in algebra performance and confidence in the pre-and post-test between the control and GeoGebra groups. GeoGebra effectively improved algebra confidence, enhanced learning, and remedied the students’ least mastered skills. GeoGebra is recommended as an instructional material in teaching and learning Algebra and can be extended to other mathematics content areas. (shrink)

This paper is a contribution to graded model theory, in the context of mathematical fuzzy logic. We study characterizations of classes of graded structures in terms of the syntactic form of their first-order axiomatization. We focus on classes given by universal and universal-existential sentences. In particular, we prove two amalgamation results using the technique of diagrams in the setting of structures valued on a finite MTL-algebra, from which analogues of the Łoś–Tarski and the Chang–Łoś–Suszko preservation theorems follow.

We review our approach to quantum mechanics adding also some new interesting results. We start by giving proof of two important theorems on the existence of the A(Si) and i,±1 N Clifford algebras. This last algebra gives proof of the von Neumann basic postulates on the quantum measurement explaining thus in an algebraic manner the wave function collapse postulated in standard quantum theory. In this manner we reach the objective to expose a self-consistent version of quantum mechanics. In detail (...) we realize a bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics recovering all the basic foundations of this theory on an algebraic framework. We give proof of the quantum like Heisenberg uncertainty relations using only the basic support of the Clifford algebra. In addition we demonstrate the well known phenomenon of quantum Mach Zender interference using the same algebraic framework, as well as we give algebraic proof of quantum collapse in some cases of physical interest by direct application of the theorem that we derive to elaborate the i,±1 N algebra. We also discuss the problem of time evolution of quantum systems as well as the changes in space location, in momentum and the linked invariance principles. We are also able to re-derive the basic wave function of standard quantum mechanics by using only the Clifford algebraic approach. In this manner we obtain a full exposition of standard quantum mechanics using only the basic axioms of Clifford algebra. We also discuss more advanced features of quantum mechanics. In detail, we give demonstration of the Kocken-Specher theorem, and also we give an algebraic formulation and explanation of the EPR paradox only using the Clifford algebra. By using the same approach we also derive Bell inequalities. Our formulation is strongly based on the use of idempotents that are contained in Clifford algebra. Their counterpart in quantum mechanics is represented by the projection operators that, as it is well known, are interpreted as logical statements, following the basic von Neumann results. Von Neumann realized a matrix logic on the basis of quantum mechanics. Using the Clifford algebra we are able to invert such result. According to the results previously obtained by Orlov in 1994, we are able to give proof that quantum mechanics derives from logic. We show that indeterminism and quantum interference have their origin in the logic. Therefore, it seems that we may conclude that quantum mechanics, as it appears when investigated by the Clifford algebra, is a two-faced theory in the sense that it looks from one side to “matter per se”, thus to objects but simultaneously also to conceptual entities. We advance the basic conclusion of the paper: There are stages of our reality in which we no more can separate the logic ( and thus cognition and thus conceptual entity) from the features of “matter per se”. In quantum mechanics the logic, and thus the cognition and thus the conceptual entity-cognitive performance, assume the same importance as the features of what is being described. We are at levels of reality in which the truths of logical statements about dynamic variables become dynamic variables themselves so that a profound link is established from its starting in this theory between physics and conceptual entities. Finally, in this approach there is not an absolute definition of logical truths. Transformations , and thus … “redefinitions”…. of truth values are permitted in such scheme as well as the well established invariance principles, clearly indicate . (shrink)

A wide family of many-valued logics—for instance, those based on the weak Kleene algebra—includes a non-classical truth-value that is ‘contaminating’ in the sense that whenever the value is assigned to a formula φ⁠, any complex formula in which φ appears is assigned that value as well. In such systems, the contaminating value enjoys a wide range of interpretations, suggesting scenarios in which more than one of these interpretations are called for. This calls for an evaluation of systems with multiple contaminating (...) values. In this paper, we consider the countably infinite family of multiple-conclusion consequence relations in which classical logic is enriched with one or more contaminating values whose behavior is determined by a linear ordering between them. We consider some motivations and applications for such systems and provide general characterizations for all consequence relations in this family. Finally, we provide sequent calculi for a pair of four-valued logics including two linearly ordered contaminating values before defining two-sided sequent calculi corresponding to each of the infinite family of many-valued logics studied in this paper. (shrink)

Recent research on algebraic models of _quasi-Nelson logic_ has brought new attention to a number of classes of algebras which result from enriching (subreducts of) Heyting algebras with a special modal operator, known in the literature as a _nucleus_. Among these various algebraic structures, for which we employ the umbrella term _intuitionistic modal algebras_, some have been studied since at least the 1970s, usually within the framework of topology and sheaf theory. Others may seem more exotic, for their (...) primitive operations arise from algebraic terms of the intuitionistic modal language which have not been previously considered. We shall for instance investigate the variety of _weak implicative semilattices_, whose members are (non-necessarily distributive) meet semilattices endowed with a nucleus and an implication operation which is not a relative pseudo-complement but satisfies the postulates of Celani and Jansana’s strict implication. For each of these new classes of algebras we establish a representation and a topological duality which generalize the known ones for Heyting algebras enriched with a nucleus. (shrink)

In 1988, J. Ivlev proposed some (non-normal) modal systems which are semantically characterized by four-valued non-deterministic matrices in the sense of A. Avron and I. Lev. Swap structures are multialgebras (a.k.a. hyperalgebras) of a special kind, which were introduced in 2016 by W. Carnielli and M. Coniglio in order to give a non-deterministic semantical account for several paraconsistent logics known as logics of formal inconsistency, which are not algebraizable by means of the standard techniques. Each swap structure induces naturally a (...) non-deterministic matrix. The aim of this paper is to obtain a swap structures semantics for some Ivlev-like modal systems proposed in 2015 by M. Coniglio, L. Fariñas del Cerro and N. Peron. Completeness results will be stated by means of the notion of Lindenbaum–Tarski swap structures, which constitute a natural generalization to multialgebras of the concept of Lindenbaum–Tarski algebras. (shrink)

Boolean-valued models of set theory were independently introduced by Scott, Solovay and Vopěnka in 1965, offering a natural and rich alternative for describing forcing. The original method was adapted by Takeuti, Titani, Kozawa and Ozawa to lattice-valued models of set theory. After this, Löwe and Tarafder proposed a class of algebras based on a certain kind of implication which satisfy several axioms of ZF. From this class, they found a specific 3-valued model called PS3 which satisfies all the axioms (...) of ZF, and can be expanded with a paraconsistent negation *, thus obtaining a paraconsistent model of ZF. The logic (PS3 ,*) coincides (up to language) with da Costa and D'Ottaviano logic J3, a 3-valued paraconsistent logic that have been proposed independently in the literature by several authors and with different motivations such as CluNs, LFI1 and MPT. We propose in this paper a family of algebraic models of ZFC based on LPT0, another linguistic variant of J3 introduced by us in 2016. The semantics of LPT0, as well as of its first-order version QLPT0, is given by twist structures defined over Boolean agebras. From this, it is possible to adapt the standard Boolean-valued models of (classical) ZFC to twist-valued models of an expansion of ZFC by adding a paraconsistent negation. We argue that the implication operator of LPT0 is more suitable for a paraconsistent set theory than the implication of PS3, since it allows for genuinely inconsistent sets w such that [(w = w)] = 1/2 . This implication is not a 'reasonable implication' as defined by Löwe and Tarafder. This suggests that 'reasonable implication algebras' are just one way to define a paraconsistent set theory. Our twist-valued models are adapted to provide a class of twist-valued models for (PS3,*), thus generalizing Löwe and Tarafder result. It is shown that they are in fact models of ZFC (not only of ZF). (shrink)

One of the most expected properties of a logical system is that it can be algebraizable, in the sense that an algebraic counterpart of the deductive machinery could be found. Since the inception of da Costa's paraconsistent calculi, an algebraic equivalent for such systems have been searched. It is known that these systems are non self-extensional (i.e., they do not satisfy the replacement property). More than this, they are not algebraizable in the sense of Blok-Pigozzi. The same negative results hold (...) for several systems of the hierarchy of paraconsistent logics known as Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs). Because of this, these logics are uniquely characterized by semantics of non-deterministic kind. This paper offers a solution for two open problems in the domain of paraconsistency, in particular connected to algebraization of LFIs, by obtaining several LFIs weaker than C1, each of one is algebraizable in the standard Lindenbaum-Tarski's sense by a suitable variety of Boolean algebras extended with operators. This means that such LFIs satisfy the replacement property. The weakest LFI satisfying replacement presented here is called RmbC, which is obtained from the basic LFI called mbC. Some axiomatic extensions of RmbC are also studied, and in addition a neighborhood semantics is defined for such systems. It is shown that RmbC can be defined within the minimal bimodal non-normal logic E+E defined by the fusion of the non-normal modal logic E with itself. Finally, the framework is extended to first-order languages. RQmbC, the quantified extension of RmbC, is shown to be sound and complete w.r.t. BALFI semantics. (shrink)

Deontic logic is devoted to the study of logical properties of normative predicates such as permission, obligation and prohibition. Since it is usual to apply these predicates to actions, many deontic logicians have proposed formalisms where actions and action combinators are present. Some standard action combinators are action conjunction, choice between actions and not doing a given action. These combinators resemble boolean operators, and therefore the theory of boolean algebra offers a well-known athematical framework to study the properties of the (...) classic deontic operators when applied to actions. In his seminal work, Segerberg uses constructions coming from boolean algebras to formalize the usual deontic notions. Segerberg’s work provided the initial step to understand logical properties of deontic operators when they are applied to actions. In the last years, other authors have proposed related logics. In this chapter we introduce Segerberg’s work, study related formalisms and investigate further challenges in this area. (shrink)

This study primarily assessed students' achievement in mathematics using a mobile educational application to help them learn and adapt to changes in education. The study involved selected Grade 9 students at a public high school in Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines. This study used a quasi-experimental method, particularly a post-test control group design. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies, percent, mean, and standard deviation were used to describe the achievement of the students in mathematics. A t-test for independent samples was also computed to (...) determine if there is a significant difference between the students’ achievement in mathematics after using the mobile educational application by the control and experimental groups. Results revealed that students' achievement in mathematics was very proficient after using the application. Moreover, the usage of educational mobile applications has a better impact on students' achievement in mathematics than the traditional approach to teaching. Teachers are encouraged to place priority on solving problems. Overall, the use of the mobile educational application can enhance learning in mathematics, thus the continued use of the said application is advised. (shrink)

The paper aims to establish if Grassmann’s notion of an extensive form involved an epistemological change in the understanding of geometry and of mathematical knowledge. Firstly, it will examine if an ontological shift in geometry is determined by the vectorial representation of extended magnitudes. Giving up homogeneity, and considering geometry as an application of extension theory, Grassmann developed a different notion of a geometrical object, based on abstract constraints concerning the construction of forms rather than on the homogeneity conditions required (...) by the modern version of the theory of proportions. Secondly, Grassmann’s conception of mathematical knowledge will be investigated. Parting from the traditional definition of mathematics as a science of magnitudes, Grassmann considered mathematical forms as particulars rather than universals: the classification of the branches of mathematics was thus based on different operational rules, rather than on empirical criteria of abstraction or on the distinction of different species belonging to a common genus. It will be argued that a different notion of generalization is thus involved, and that the knowledge of mathematical forms relies on the understanding of the rules of generation of the forms themselves. Finally, the paper will analyse if Grassmann’s approach in the first edition of the Ausdehnungslehre should be explained in terms of the notion of purity of method, and if it clashes with Grassmann’s later conventionalism. Although in the second edition the features of the operations are chosen by convention, as it is the case for the anti-commutative property of the multiplication, the choice is oriented by our understanding of the resulting forms: a simplification in the algebraic calculus need not correspond to a simplification in the ‘dimensional’ interpretation of the result of the multiplicative operation. (shrink)

Noun phrases with overt determiners, such as <i>some apples</i> or <i>a quantity of milk</i>, differ from bare noun phrases like <i>apples</i> or <i>milk</i> in their contribution to aspectual composition. While this has been attributed to syntactic or algebraic properties of these noun phrases, such accounts have explanatory shortcomings. We suggest instead that the relevant property that distinguishes between the two classes of noun phrases derives from two modes of existential quantification, one of which holds the values of a variable fixed (...) throughout a quantificational context while the other allows them to vary. Inspired by Dynamic Plural Logic and Dependence Logic, we propose Plural Predicate Logic as an extension of Predicate Logic to formalize this difference. We suggest that temporal <i>for</i>-adverbials are sensitive to aspect because of the way they manipulate quantificational contexts, and that analogous manipulations occur with spatial <i>for</i>-adverbials, habituals, and the quantifier <i>all</i>. (shrink)

Logics based on weak Kleene algebra (WKA) and related structures have been recently proposed as a tool for reasoning about flaws in computer programs. The key element of this proposal is the presence, in WKA and related structures, of a non-classical truth-value that is “contaminating” in the sense that whenever the value is assigned to a formula ϕ, any complex formula in which ϕ appears is assigned that value as well. Under such interpretations, the contaminating states represent occurrences of a (...) flaw. However, since different programs and machines can interact with (or be nested into) one another, we need to account for different kind of errors, and this calls for an evaluation of systems with multiple contaminating values. In this paper, we make steps toward these evaluation systems by considering two logics, HYB1 and HYB2, whose semantic interpretations account for two contaminating values beside classical values 0 and 1. In particular, we provide two main formal contributions. First, we give a characterization of their relations of (multiple-conclusion) logical consequence—that is, necessary and sufficient conditions for a set Δ of formulas to logically follow from a set Γ of formulas in HYB1 or HYB2 . Second, we provide sound and complete sequent calculi for the two logics. (shrink)

We are much better equipped to let the facts reveal themselves to us instead of blinding ourselves to them or stubbornly trying to force them into preconceived molds. We no longer embarrass ourselves in front of our students, for example, by insisting that “Some Xs are Y” means the same as “Some X is Y”, and lamely adding “for purposes of logic” whenever there is pushback. Logic teaching in this century can exploit the new spirit of objectivity, humility, clarity, observationalism, (...) contextualism, and pluralism. Besides the new spirit there have been quiet developments in logic and its history and philosophy that could radically improve logic teaching. One rather conspicuous example is that the process of refining logical terminology has been productive. Future logic students will no longer be burdened by obscure terminology and they will be able to read, think, talk, and write about logic in a more careful and more rewarding manner. Closely related is increased use and study of variable-enhanced natural language as in “Every proposition x that implies some proposition y that is false also implies some proposition z that is true”. Another welcome development is the culmination of the slow demise of logicism. No longer is the teacher blocked from using examples from arithmetic and algebra fearing that the students had been indoctrinated into thinking that every mathematical truth was a tautology and that every mathematical falsehood was a contradiction. A fifth welcome development is the separation of laws of logic from so-called logical truths, i.e., tautologies. Now we can teach the logical independence of the laws of excluded middle and non-contradiction without fear that students had been indoctrinated into thinking that every logical law was a tautology and that every falsehood of logic was a contradiction. This separation permits the logic teacher to apply logic in the clarification of laws of logic. This lecture expands the above points, which apply equally well in first, second, and third courses, i.e. in “critical thinking”, “deductive logic”, and “symbolic logic”. (shrink)

A system of logic usually comprises a language for which a model-theory and a proof-theory are defined. The model-theory defines the semantic notion of model-theoretic logical consequence (⊨), while the proof-theory defines the proof- theoretic notion of logical consequence (or logical derivability, ⊢). If the system in question is sound and complete, then the two notions of logical consequence are extensionally equivalent. The concept of full formalization is a more restrictive one and requires in addition the preservation of the standard (...) meanings of the logical terms in all the admissible interpretations of the logical calculus, as it is proof-theoretically defined. Although classical first-order logic is sound and complete, its standard formalizations fall short to be full formalizations since they allow non-intended interpretations. This fact poses a challenge for the logical inferentialism program, whose main tenet is that the meanings of the logical terms are uniquely determined by the formal axioms or rules of inference that govern their use in a logical calculus, i.e., logical inferentialism requires a categorical calculus. This paper is the first part of a more elaborated study which will analyze the categoricity problem from its beginning until the most recent approaches. I will first start by describing the problem of a full formalization in the general framework in which Carnap (1934/1937, 1943) formulated it for classical logic. Then, in sections IV and V, I shall discuss the way in which the mathematicians B.A. Bernstein (1932) and E.V. Huntington (1933) have previously formulated and analyzed it in algebraic terms for propositional logic and, finally, I shall discuss some critical reactions Nagel (1943), Hempel (1943), Fitch (1944), and Church (1944) formulated to these approaches. (shrink)

The pragmatic notion of assertion has an important inferential role in logic. There are also many notational forms to express assertions in logical systems. This paper reviews, compares and analyses languages with signs for assertions, including explicit signs such as Frege’s and Dalla Pozza’s logical systems and implicit signs with no specific sign for assertion, such as Peirce’s algebraic and graphical logics and the recent modification of the latter termed Assertive Graphs. We identify and discuss the main ‘points’ of these (...) notations on the logical representation of assertions, and evaluate their systems from the perspective of the philosophy of logical notations. Pragmatic assertions turn out to be useful in providing intended interpretations of a variety of logical systems. (shrink)

In abstract algebraic logic, many systems, such as those paraconsistent logics taking inspiration from da Costa's hierarchy, are not algebraizable by even the broadest standard methodologies, as that of Blok and Pigozzi. However, these logics can be semantically characterized by means of non-deterministic algebraic structures such as Nmatrices, RNmatrices and swap structures. These structures are based on multialgebras, which generalize algebras by allowing the result of an operation to assume a non-empty set of values. This leads to an interest (...) in exploring the foundations of multialgebras applied to the study of logic systems. -/- It is well known from universal algebra that, for every signature Sigma, there exist algebras over Sigma which are absolutely free, meaning that they do not satisfy any identities or, alternatively, satisfy the universal mapping property for the class of Sigma-algebras. Furthermore, once we fix a cardinality of the generating set, they are, up to isomorphisms, unique, and equal to algebras of terms (or propositional formulas, in the context of logic). Equivalently, the forgetful functor, from the category of Sigma-algebras to Set, has a left adjoint. This result does not extend to multialgebras. Not only multialgebras satisfying the universal mapping property do not exist, but the forgetful functor U, from the category of Sigma-multialgebras to Set, does not have a left adjoint. -/- In this paper we generalize, in a natural way, algebras of terms to multialgebras of terms, whose family of submultialgebras enjoys many properties of the former. One example is that, to every pair consisting of a function, from a submultialgebra of a multialgebra of terms to another multialgebra, and a collection of choices (which selects how a homomorphism approaches indeterminacies), there corresponds a unique homomorphism, what resembles the universal mapping property. Another example is that the multialgebras of terms are generated by a set that may be viewed as a strong basis, which we call the ground of the multialgebra. Submultialgebras of multialgebras of terms are what we call weakly free multialgebras. Finally, with these definitions at hand, we offer a simple proof that multialgebras with the universal mapping property for the class of all multialgebras do not exist and that U does not have a left adjoint. (shrink)

There are two foundational, but not fully developed, ideas in paraconsistency, namely, the duality between paraconsistent and intuitionistic paradigms, and the introduction of logical operators that express meta-logical notions in the object language. The aim of this paper is to show how these two ideas can be adequately accomplished by the Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs) and by the Logics of Formal Undeterminedness (LFUs). LFIs recover the validity of the principle of explosion in a paraconsistent scenario, while LFUs recover the (...) validity of the principle of excluded middle in a paracomplete scenario. We introduce definitions of duality between inference rules and connectives that allow comparing rules and connectives that belong to different logics. Two formal systems are studied, the logics mbC and mbD, that display the duality between paraconsistency and paracompleteness as a duality between inference rules added to a common core– in the case studied here, this common core is classical positive propositional logic (CPL + ). The logics mbC and mbD are equipped with recovery operators that restore classical logic for, respectively, consistent and determined propositions. These two logics are then combined obtaining a pair of logics of formal inconsistency and undeterminedness (LFIUs), namely, mbCD and mbCDE. The logic mbCDE exhibits some nice duality properties. Besides, it is simultaneously paraconsistent and paracomplete, and able to recover the principles of excluded middle and explosion at once. The last sections offer an algebraic account for such logics by adapting the swap-structures semantics framework of the LFIs the LFUs. This semantics highlights some subtle aspects of these logics, and allows us to prove decidability by means of finite non-deterministic matrices. (shrink)

The philosophy of mathematics has been accused of paying insufficient attention to mathematical practice: one way to cope with the problem, the one we will follow in this paper on extensive magnitudes, is to combine the `history of ideas' and the `philosophy of models' in a logical and epistemological perspective. The history of ideas allows the reconstruction of the theory of extensive magnitudes as a theory of ordered algebraic structures; the philosophy of models allows an investigation into the way epistemology (...) might affect relevant mathematical notions. The article takes two historical examples as a starting point for the investigation of the role of numerical models in the construction of a system of non-Archimedean magnitudes. A brief exposition of the theories developed by Giuseppe Veronese and by Rodolfo Bettazzi at the end of the 19th century will throw new light on the role played by magnitudes and numbers in the development of the concept of a non-Archimedean order. Different ways of introducing non-Archimedean models will be compared and the influence of epistemological models will be evaluated. Particular attention will be devoted to the comparison between the models that oriented Veronese's and Bettazzi's works and the mathematical theories they developed, but also to the analysis of the way epistemological beliefs affected the concepts of continuity and measurement. (shrink)

2006. George Boole. Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2nd edition. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA. -/- George Boole (1815-1864), whose name lives among modern computer-related sciences in Boolean Algebra, Boolean Logic, Boolean Operations, and the like, is one of the most celebrated logicians of all time. Ironically, his actual writings often go unread and his actual contributions to logic are virtually unknown—despite the fact that he was one of the clearest writers in the field. Working with various students including Susan Wood and Sriram (...) Nambiar, I have written several publications trying to set the record straight—but so far to little avail. This encyclopedia entry is one more attempt to set the record straight in a way that can be appreciated by non-experts.Also see https://www.academia.edu/10161999/Booles_criteria_of_validity_and_invalidity . (shrink)

This paper for an upcoming journal volume examines Grete Hermann's Naturphilosophischen Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik (1935) and the relative context, or perspectival, interpretation of standard quantum mechanics found therein. I find an argument for the emergence of limited spatio-temporal and retrocausal stories, from a chosen experimental perspective, within a larger set of entangled systems not subject to a spatio-temporal interpretation. This argument can be read in reverse as giving some of the necessary preconditions of spatio-temporal representations as based upon perspectival relations, (...) carrying on a Kantian transcendental argument on one hand, and on the other hand, looking forward to Weyl's use of symmetry groups, Lie algebras and their representations in quantum mechanics. (shrink)

For Tarski talk about the truth in a language, and not generate contradictions, it requires doing it from a different language with greater expressive power: the metalanguage. So, a metalanguage is a language that is used to talk about another language. In scientific language this distinction is very important. In physics, the notion of symmetry is shown through the language used within physical theories. In this way, through algebraic language ─automorphism─ we shown the symmetry ─invariancia, order, equilibrium─ finding (within the (...) language of these theories) the use of the notion sometimes as a principle and sometimes as argument. The distinction in use of the notion of symmetry, on the part of physics, allows us to glimpse symmetry as a term of the metalanguage. Through a brief historical reconstruction ─from the Greeks to present time─ we show the notion of symmetry as a metalanguage term distinguishing the use ─principle and argument─ that physics makes of the concept. Keywords: symmetry, automorphism, principle, argument. (shrink)

John Corcoran. 1979 Review of Hintikka and Remes. The Method of Analysis (Reidel, 1974). Mathematical Reviews 58 3202 #21388. -/- The “method of analysis” is a technique used by ancient Greek mathematicians (and perhaps by Descartes, Newton, and others) in connection with discovery of proofs of difficult theorems and in connection with discovery of constructions of elusive geometric figures. Although this method was originally applied in geometry, its later application to number played an important role in the early development of (...) algebra [Jacob Klein, English translation, Greek mathematical thought and the origin of algebra, especially pp. 154–157, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1968]. -/- It is universally agreed that the method of analysis begins by “assuming the thing sought after” (e.g., in geometry, the truth of the proposition to be proved or the existence of the geometric figure to be constructed). Aside from this, little else can be taken for granted. There is disagreement concerning the “direction of analysis”, i.e. whether one is to seek implications of the assumption or whether one is to seek implicants of it. There is also disagreement concerning what is to be “anatomized” (analyzed), i.e., whether one analyzes mathematical objects (figures), mathematical propositions (the axioms, known theorems, and analytic assumption) or an imagined proof (of the analytic assumption from axioms and known theorems). (shrink)

For Tarski talk about the truth in a language, and not generate contradictions, it requires doing it from a different language with greater expressive power: the metalanguage. So, a metalanguage is a language that is used to talk about another language. In scientific language this distinction is very important. In physics, the notion of symmetry is shown through the language used within physical theories. In this way, through algebraic language ─automorphism─ we shown the symmetry ─invariancia, order, equilibrium─ finding (within the (...) language of these theories) the use of the notion sometimes as a principle and sometimes as argument. The distinction in use of the notion of symmetry, on the part of physics, allows us to glimpse symmetry as a term of the metalanguage. Through a brief historical reconstruction ─from the Greeks to present time─ we show the notion of symmetry as a metalanguage term distinguishing the use ─principle and argument─ that physics makes of the concept. (shrink)

We present a novel approach to quantum theory construction that involves maximizing the Shannon entropy of quantum measurements relative to their initial preparation. By constraining the maximization problem with a phase that vanish under measurements, we obtain quantum mechanics (vanishing U(1)-valued phase), relativistic quantum mechanics (vanishing Spin^c(3,1)-valued phase), and quantum gravity (vanishing SL(4,R)-valued phase). The first two cases are equivalent to established theory, whereas the later case yields a quantum theory of accelerated reference frames, in which a quantized version of (...) the Einstein field equation lives. Specifically, the spacetime interval is promoted to an observable, effectively building the metric tensor from the underlying quantum structure. Subsequently, the Schrödinger equation generates metric tensor diffeomorphisms and SO(3,1) transformations. Remarkably, the quantized Einstein Field Equations are provably non-perturbatively finite. Moreover, the SU(3)xSU(2)xU(1) gauge symmetries of the Standard Model arise naturally without additional assumptions. Finally, the solution is consistent only with 3+1 spacetime dimensions, as it encounters obstructions in all other dimensional configurations. This framework integrates quantum mechanics, relativistic quantum mechanics, quantum gravity, spacetime dimensionality, and particle physics gauge symmetries from a simple entropy maximization problem constrained by a vanishing phase, yielding the most parsimonious formulation of fundamental physics to date. (shrink)

Starting with 1985, we discovered the possible existence of electrons with net helicity in biomolecules as amino acids and their possibility to discern between the two quantum spin states. It is well known that the question of a possible fundamental role of quantum mechanics in biological matter constitutes still a long debate. In the last ten years we have given a rather complete quantum mechanical elaboration entirely based on Clifford algebra whose basic entities are isomorphic to the well known spin (...) Pauli matrices. A number of our recent results indicate the possible logical origin of quantum mechanics and the direct admission of quantum mechanics in the field of cognitive sciences. In February 2011 the authors Gölder et al., published their important discovery on Science about Spin Selectivity in Electron Transmission Through Self-Assembled Monolayers of Double-Stranded DNA confirming in such manner that the principles of quantum mechanics apply to biological systems. (shrink)

We review a rough scheme of quantum mechanics using the Clifford algebra. Following the steps previously published in a paper by another author [31], we demonstrate that quantum interference arises in a Clifford algebraic formulation of quantum mechanics. In 1932 J. von Neumann showed that projection operators and, in particular, quantum density matrices can be interpreted as logical statements. In accord with a previously obtained result by V. F Orlov , in this paper we invert von Neumann’s result. Instead of (...) constructing logic from quantum mechanics , we construct quantum mechanics from an extended classical logic. It follows that the origins of the two most fundamental quantum phenomena , the indeterminism and the interference of probabilities, lie not in the traditional physics by itself but in the logical structure as realized here by the Clifford algebra. (shrink)

We comment some recent results obtained by using a Clifford bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics in order to formulate the conclusion that quantum mechanics has its origin in the logic, and relates conceptual entities. Such results touch directly the basic problem about the structure of our cognitive and conceptual dynamics and thus of our mind. The problem of exploring consciousness results consequently to be strongly linked. This is the reason because studies on quantum mechanics applied to this matter are (...) so important for neurologists and psychologists. Under this profile we present some experimental results showing violation of Bell inequality during the MBTI test in investigation of C.V. Jung’s theory of personality. (shrink)

The thesis of this paper is that Information, Cognition and a Principle of Existence are intrinsically structured in the quantum model of reality. We reach such evidence by using the Clifford algebra. We analyze quantization in some traditional cases of quantum mechanics and, in particular in quantum harmonic oscillator, orbital angular momentum and hydrogen atom.

We review a rough scheme of quantum mechanics using the Clifford algebra. Following the steps previously published in a paper by another author [31], we demonstrate that quantum interference arises in a Clifford algebraic formulation of quantum mechanics. In 1932 J. von Neumann showed that projection operators and, in particular, quantum density matrices can be interpreted as logical statements. In accord with a previously obtained result by V. F Orlov , in this paper we invert von Neumann’s result. Instead of (...) constructing logic from quantum mechanics , we construct quantum mechanics from an extended classical logic. It follows that the origins of the two most fundamental quantum phenomena , the indeterminism and the interference of probabilities, lie not in the traditional physics by itself but in the logical structure as realized here by the Clifford algebra. (shrink)

A model of consciousness and conscious experience is introduced. Starting with a non-Lipschitz Chaotic dynamics of neural activity, we propose that the synaptic transmission between adjacent as well as distant neurons should be regulated in brain dynamics through quantum tunneling. Further, based on various studies of different previous authors, we consider the emergence of very large quantum mechanical system representable by an abstract quantum net entirely based on quantum-like entities having in particular the important feature of expressing self-reference similar to (...) what occurs in consciousness. The properties of such quantum-like mind entities are discussed in detail. A quantum-like model of conscious experience is also discussed. It is shown that such quantum mechanical entities are able to arrange themselves alternatively on the basis of the subject story, memory, and pain-pleasure in response to an external stimulus, thus giving the subject the possibility to response to the stimulus on the basis of his emotion as well as cognitive state. Finally, we discuss the possible connections between the quantum-like model introduced in this paper and the chaotic behaviors often identified experimentally in studies on brain dynamics. Part I of this article contains: Introduction; 1. Non Lipschitz Terminal Dynamics of Single Neuron Activity; and References; 2. Quantum Mechanical Properties of Neuron Dynamics; and 3. A Quantum Model of Consciousness I. (shrink)

We start from previous studies of G.N. Ord and A.S. Deakin showing that both the classical diffusion equation and Schrödinger equation of quantum mechanics have a common stump. Such result is obtained in rigorous terms since it is demonstrated that both diffusion and Schrödinger equations are manifestation of the same mathematical axiomatic set of the Clifford algebra. By using both such ( ) i A S and the i,±1 N algebra, it is evidenced, however, that possibly the two basic equations (...) of the physics cannot be reconciled. 1. (shrink)

We indicate a new way in the solution of the problem of the quantum measurement . In past papers we used the well-known formalism of the density matrix using an algebraic approach in a two states quantum spin system S, considering the particular case of three anticommuting elements. We demonstrated that, during the wave collapse, we have a transition from the standard Clifford algebra, structured in its space and metrics, to the new spatial structure of the Clifford dihedral algebra. This (...) structured geometric transition, which occurs during the interaction of the S system with the macroscopic measurement system M, causes the destruction of the interferential factors. In the present paper we construct a detailed model of the (S+M) interaction evidencing the particular role of the Time Ordering in the (S+M) coupling since we have a time asymmetric interaction . We demonstrate that , during the measurement , the physical circumstance that the fermion creation and annihilation operators of the S system must be destroyed during such interaction has a fundamental role . (shrink)

Multialgebras have been much studied in mathematics and in computer science. In 2016 Carnielli and Coniglio introduced a class of multialgebras called swap structures, as a semantic framework for dealing with several Logics of Formal Inconsistency that cannot be semantically characterized by a single finite matrix. In particular, these LFIs are not algebraizable by the standard tools of abstract algebraic logic. In this paper, the first steps towards a theory of non-deterministic algebraization of logics by swap structures are given. Specifically, (...) a formal study of swap structures for LFIs is developed, by adapting concepts of universal algebra to multialgebras in a suitable way. A decomposition theorem similar to Birkhoff’s representation theorem is obtained for each class of swap structures. Moreover, when applied to the 3-valued algebraizable logics J3 and Ciore, their classes of algebraic models are retrieved, and the swap structures semantics become twist structures semantics. This fact, together with the existence of a functor from the category of Boolean algebras to the category of swap structures for each LFI, suggests that swap structures can be seen as non-deterministic twist structures. This opens new avenues for dealing with non-algebraizable logics by the more general methodology of multialgebraic semantics. (shrink)

Extension is probably the most general natural property. Is it a fundamental property? Leibniz claimed the answer was no, and that the structureless intuition of extension concealed more fundamental properties and relations. This paper follows Leibniz's program through Herbart and Riemann to Grassmann and uses Grassmann's algebra of points to build up levels of extensions algebraically. Finally, the connection between extension and measurement is considered.

This essay is a contribution to the historical phenomenology of science, taking as its point of departure Husserl’s later philosophy of science and Jacob Klein’s seminal work on the emergence of the symbolic conception of number in European mathematics during the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Sinceneither Husserl nor Klein applied their ideas to actual theories of modern mathematical physics, this essay attempts to do so through a case study of the conceptof “spacetime.” In §1, I sketch Klein’s account of (...) the emergence of the symbolic conception of number, beginning with Vieta in the late sixteenth century. In §2,through a series of historical illustrations, I show how the principal impediment to assimilating the new symbolic algebra to mathematical physics, namely, thedimensionless character of symbolic number, is overcome via the translation of the traditional language of ratio and proportion into the symbolic language of equations. In §§3–4, I critically examine the concept of “Minkowski spacetime,” specifically, the purported analogy between the Pythagorean distance formula and the Minkowski “spacetime interval.” Finally, in §5, I address the question of whether the concept of Minkowski spacetime is, as generally assumed, indispensable to Einstein’s general theory of relativity. (shrink)

An overview of the problem of constructing extension combinatorially from qualities cum dispositional powers. In the model recommended here, Grassmann's algebra provides the combinatorial structure while Machian elements give the content.

A new proof style adequate for modal logics is defined from the polynomial ring calculus. The new semantics not only expresses truth conditions of modal formulas by means of polynomials, but also permits to perform deductions through polynomial handling. This paper also investigates relationships among the PRC here defined, the algebraic semantics for modal logics, equational logics, the Dijkstra???Scholten equational-proof style, and rewriting systems. The method proposed is throughly exemplified for S 5, and can be easily extended to other modal (...) logics. (shrink)

In this paper, I present two crucial problems for Wolff’s metaphysics of quantities: 1) The structural identification problem and 2) the Pythagorean problem. The former is the problem of uniquely defining a general algebraic structure for all quantities; the latter is the problem of distinguishing physical quantitative structure from mathematical quantities. While Wolff seems to have a consistent and elegant solution to the first problem, the second problem may put in jeopardy his metaphysical view on quantities as spaces. After drawing (...) a parallelism between Wolff’s treatment of quantitative structures and Frege’s conception of quantitative domain, I propose a solution to the Pythagorean problem based on the idea that mathematical structures are the result of applying an abstraction principle on physical quantitative structures. In particular, I propose the view that abstraction may be seen as the operation of structure determination which transforms concrete physical quantities (i.e. undetermined structures) into abstract mathematical quantities (fully determined structures of thin and shallow objects). (shrink)

RENÉ DESCARTES E O MÉTODO CARTESIANO -/- RENÉ DESCARTES AND THE CARTESIAN METHOD -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva - CAP-UFPE, IFPE-BJ e UFRPE. E-mails: [email protected] e [email protected]. WhatsApp: (82)98143-8399. -/- INTRODUÇÃO -/- Antes de abordar a metafísica tal qual Descartes a propõe como uma sólida “fundamentação” das ciências e, também, antes de falar das ciências construídas para a busca desse fundamento, é necessário analisar o método cartesiano, salve que é a alma desse presente artigo. Não se trata apenas de (...) relatar os preceitos do método ao seu modelo matemático, e sim, também, para entender porque o método em si necessita de uma fundamentação alicerçada na metafísica. Mas isso é a maneira pelo qual o projeto revolucionário de Descartes substituiu a autoridade da tradição pela autoridade da razão. -/- I – UM PROJETO REVOLUCIONÁRIO -/- No se pode deixar atingir-se, lendo o Discurso do Método, pelo caráter revolucionário que Descartes queria conferir ao seu projeto. É notável, e vale salientar o cuidado que Descartes toma na primeira parte, sublinhando o que seu projeto tem de singular: “Assim, meu propósito não é ensinar aqui o método que cada um deve seguir para bem conduzir sua razão, mas somente mostrar de que modo procurei conduzir a minha” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 5). Ainda mais notável é o fato escolhido por Descartes e destacado na segunda parte, a da casa que deve ser derrubada para reconstruí-la: -/- É verdade que não vemos demolirem-se todas as casas de uma cidade só com o propósito de refazê-las de outra forma e de tornar as ruas mais belas, mas não é incomum vermos muitos mandarem derrubar as suas para reconstruí-las, e até, por vezes, a isso são obrigados quando elas correm o risco de cair por si mesmas e os alicerces não estão muito firmes (DESCARTES, 1996. pp. 17-18). -/- Descartes enfatiza explicitamente a oposição entre tal abordagem e a estratégia reformista de “redigitar” a sua casa, organizando-a, reparando-a aqui e ali. Certamente ele está combatendo a ideia revolucionária na política, o design ambicioso daqueles que querem perturbar o Estado, porque nesta área a destruição tornaria a reconstrução futura impossível. Mas o que é insano sobre “uma cidade inteira” torna-se possível quando se trata de cada um de sua própria casa. -/- O que é possível torna-se necessário, quando a casa ameaça entrar em colapso, uma vez que seus alicerces são vulneráveis. Casa vacilante, que seria inútil só querer reparar, é assim que Descartes considera o todo “opiniões” que lhe foram transmitidas em sua educação. Essas opiniões são, acima de tudo, incertas: pode haver alguma verdade nelas, mas provavelmente também há o lado falso, e essa mistura indissociável faz com que todas sejam falsas, a verdade só tem valor para nós se pudermos distinguir com certeza do erro. -/- O julgamento negativo de Descartes de tudo o que ele tem, como escreve, “recebido em dívida”, pressupõe, é claro, uma crítica do conteúdo dessas opiniões e, acima de tudo, uma crítica aos princípios sobre os quais eles descansam. Mas isso não é o suficiente para fazer as pessoas entenderem a escolha inicial de uma abordagem revolucionária, de preferência ao empreendimento reformista, que seria criticar, uma após a outra, as opiniões recebidas, e consolidar, pouco a pouco, a sua “Casa”. Mais do que o conteúdo peculiar das opiniões recebidas, é o próprio fato que elas são recebidas, em uma aquisição desordenada e perigosa, o que importa. E se temos que revolucionar o conhecimento, se temos que destruir essas opiniões antes de substituí-las por outras é, antes de mais nada, uma questão de substituir conquista controlada da desordem e chance de sua aquisição, em vez de se limitar a correções que só aumentariam essa confusão. -/- Nisso, a decisão primeira de Descartes ultrapassa as circunstâncias históricas do seu aparecimento, e conserva em todos os tempos o valor de um modelo para o pensamento: a filosofia nasce de uma ruptura, não com esta ou aquela tradição, mas com a tradição como tal. -/- II – DESCARTES E A TRADIÇÃO -/- A tradição é um pensamento sem sujeito: pensamento que ninguém pensa, não pensa. Descartes se opõe ao requisito essencial, para toda ciência, de ser a matéria de um sujeito: não há ciência até que toda verdade seja reconhecida em seu poder de sugerir notícias, de acordo com uma sequência que deve ser reconhecida, para que eu (Descartes) possa reivindicar, de forma legítima, a ciência universal. Quando Descartes expressa essa afirmação, em seu próprio texto, em seus textos de juventude, o que nos parece ser a marca de uma excessiva arrogância, expressa, antes, uma condição inscrita na própria natureza do conhecimento. -/- O projeto revolucionário está assim ligado à uma ideia que Descartes enuncia no início da segunda parte do Discurso do Método: “[...] não há tanta perfeição nas obras compostas de várias peças, e feitas pelas mãos de vários mestres, como naquelas em que apenas um trabalhou” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 15). Certamente, por “perfeição, Descartes entende menos a magnitude e a riqueza essa ordem e consistência. Ele reconhece que algumas áreas são, irremediavelmente, entregues à imperfeição. Este é o caso do Estado e das instituições políticas em geral: resultados não intencionais de uma multidão de ações históricas entrelaçadas, nossas instituições nunca correspondem a um projeto consciente, e não seria razoável empreender sua reforma de acordo com tal projeto. Descartes não ignora as virtudes da cooperação para a execução de atividades materiais complexas. Porque as aptidões corporais dos homens são distintas e capazes de se especializar, os indivíduos podem interferir uns com os outros e se harmonizar visando a colaboração do todo. -/- Não obstante, as obras de pensamento, as ciências em particular, não conseguem encontrar a perfeição de que são susceptíveis por serem construídas por sucessivas sedimentações históricas, de acordo com a descoberta uma das outras, fazendo com que todas essas descobertas, a ciência, não seria obra de ninguém. Se o exercício de uma atividade manual nos impede de praticar outra (porque as mesmas mãos dificilmente podem se exercitar ao mesmo tempo para cultivar os campos e tocar a cítara), o conhecimento de uma verdade nos ajuda a encontrar outras verdades. Finja que esse conhecimento é apenas uma contribuição fragmentada para uma síntese coletiva da qual o princípio nos escapa, é desconsiderar sua fecundidade, isto é, o que faz dele um verdadeiro conhecimento. -/- O que Descartes está lutando, essa necessidade de que todos participem de uma instituição já iniciada e que ninguém pode dominar, essa herança de aceitar, enriquecer e transmitir é o que chamamos de tradição: então ele escreve o Discurso do Método não em latim, linguagem de transmissão histórica do conhecimento, mas em francês, linguagem “vulgar”. Certamente, Descartes luta contra a tradição científica e filosófica em vigor em seu tempo, a herança já enfraquecida do pensamento de Aristóteles, transmitida durante a Idade Média pelas Universidades (o que denominamos de “escolasticismo”), mas ele luta acima de tudo em sua pretensão de manter seu valor de ser, precisamente, uma tradição. Esta não é uma luta em nome da “novidade” ou da “modernidade”, que são sempre definidas em relação a uma tradição, mas uma luta em nome da verdade, o que é mais antiga do que qualquer tradição. -/- III – A LIGAÇÃO ENTRE AUTORIDADE E A VERDADE -/- Descartes assim fórmula seu projeto, na segunda parte do Discurso do Método: [...] mas, quanto às opiniões que até então eu aceitara, o melhor que podia fazer era suprimi-las de uma vez por todas, a fim de substituí-las depois, ou por outras melhores, ou então pelas mesmas, quando eu as tivesse ajustado ao nível da razão (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 18). -/- Que uma opinião poderia ter sido recebido por ele em sua vida, sem ter sido ajustada ao nível da razão, significa que foi considerada a sua verdade, sem que ele tenha que se pronunciar sobre o julgamento do que declarava verdadeiro. Então foi um preconceito, que ele achava que era verdade apenas para tê-lo recebido, isto é, por causa de sua fonte. Que a afirmação de uma opinião como verdadeira é validada por sua fonte, e isso corresponde ao que denominamos como “argumento de autoridade”: é verdade porque Platão, ou Aristóteles, disseram isso. Agora é possível, é claro, descobrir verdades lendo Platão ou Aristóteles, desde que essas descobertas sejam não apenas para conferir Platão, Aristóteles, ou qualquer outro autor (“autoritário”), mas para encontrar a si mesmo com as verdades em questão. Parece, portanto, que a revolução cartesiana visa romper o elo entre as concepções de verdade e autoridade. -/- -/- Todavia, olhando mais de perto, veremos que esse não é o caso. Quebrar o elo entre autoridade e verdade é ser crítico, enquanto Descartes encara sim o “espírito da dúvida”. Ser crítico é estar interessado apenas no conteúdo das ideias e ser perfeitamente indiferente à sua fonte. Descartes, como supracitado, não se compromete a criticar suas antigas opiniões uma após a outra, o que seria o passo mais oposto ao princípio de autoridade, quanto mais indiferente à questão da fonte. O que Descartes propõe é bem diferente: ele propõe substituir, com todas as autoridades que estão fora dele (em seu exterior), pela autoridade que está nele (em seu interior), e que muitas vezes é até confundida, veremos isso. Agora é sobre “ajustar as opiniões ao nível da razão”: a razão, isto é, a razão de Descartes, tal qual o fala e presente em cada um, deve ser autoritária em matéria de verdade, deve ser o tribunal diante do qual tudo aparece. É uma interiorização do argumento de autoridade, não é uma rejeição deste argumento. -/- A interiorização da autoridade explica o lugar central da certeza na filosofia de Descartes. O que importa na verdade é a certeza de possuí-la, e essa certeza é uma ato de confiança em relação às fonte autorizada da verdade: tudo que é “ajustado ao nível da razão” será certo, se a razão for o que é autoritário. -/- Duas questões orientadoras sucessivas inspirarão a investigação da certeza: -/- 1 – A primeira consistirá em estabelecer o que ele realmente tem certeza, delimitando o domínio da certeza autêntica daquilo que é garantido pela autoridade da razão. 2 – A segunda consistirá em se perguntar se ele está certo em ter certeza sobre algo, porque a autoridade internalizada deve se questionar. -/- A primeira questão, considerada isoladamente, leva à ideia cartesiana de método. O conjunto das duas questões, a passagem da primeira para a segunda, depois da segunda para a primeira, constitui a metafísica de Descartes. -/- IV – O QUE É A RAZÃO ? -/- O que significa ter razão em um tribunal? As primeiras linhas do Discurso do Método definem a razão como sendo um senso comum, isto é, a faculdade de distinguir a verdade da mentira, o que nos diferencia dos animais. Em outras palavras, a razão é o poder, não para racionar, mas degenerar, pensando na medida em que se pronuncia sobre qualquer objeto que se apresente. Separado em um sentido de outras faculdades do pensamento, este poder está envolvido em qualquer operação de pensamento: a memória supõe um julgamento sobre o passado, o desejo um julgamento sobre o que procurar, o amor um julgamento sobre o que é digno de ser amado... Nesse sentido, a razão se confunde com o próprio pensamento. É até confuso, para todos, consigo mesmo, pois ninguém pode julgar sua razão sem voltar a agir: mesmo aqueles que estão acostumados a reclamar do que foi dado a eles nunca reivindicam, nota Descartes, uma razão de melhor qualidade: pois isso equivaleria a desqualificar essa afirmação conforme a expressam. -/- Coextensiva com o pensamento, a razão está em nós como uma luz natural. Como a luz do Sol que ilumina a variedade das coisas no mundo sem perder sua identidade, permanecendo a mesma luz, o pensamento julgador mantém sua unidade sem nunca se quebrar ou se perder, seja qual for os objetos aos quais se aplica: seja o que for que eu julgue, é sempre eu quem julgo. A ciência deve ser difundida mediante essa ideia, isto é, como um certo modo de julgar, ou pensar, e não dá diversidade de seus objetos. -/- -/- Rejeitar as opiniões recebidas, e julgadas boas porque foram recebidas, é recuperar o poder soberano de julgar aquilo que até então passou despercebido. Colocar a razão no tribunal não é uma novidade, mas uma revolução no sentido estrito, isto é, um retorno. A razão é o senso comum, o poder, não apenas para julgar, mas julgar bem, para distinguir o verdadeiro do falso. Julgar mal, tomar o falso pela verdade, não deve ser dotado de um “poder de julgar mal”, é errado usar nosso poder para julgar bem. A diferença entre o bem e o mal não está no poder, mas no uso desse poder, na maneira de usá-lo, de proceder quando se julga, em uma palavra, o método. É necessário romper com uma aquisição sem método de conhecimento, de acordo com as influências sofridas, e conferir a si mesmo um método firme, que será como o procedimento do tribunal da razão. E como nossa capacidade de comer é saudável por si só, esse método não deve ser tomado como uma técnica destinada para melhorá-lo, para torná-lo mais eficaz, e sim como uma higiene projetada para preservá-lo. -/- Mas onde encontrar as regras desse método? Em um domínio, precisamente, onde nosso poder de regulação ou gerenciamento tem sido relativamente preservado, fazendo com que se possa explorar esse domínio, descobri-lo e extrair dele um procedimento universal. Porque o pensamento sendo esta luz que ilumina de igual forma as variedades de tudo que se apresenta a ela, o que torna-se verdadeiro nesse domínio deve ser de todos os outros. Essa área de referência é o domínio da matemática. -/- V – O MODELO MATEMÁTICO -/- Descartes acredita que é no domínio da matemática e, precisamente da geometria, que os antigos fizeram descobertas difíceis e duradouras. A geometria dos antigos e a dos modernos e, especialmente a de François Viète (1540-1603), acrescentou a análise na matemática, o que denominamos de “álgebra”. A descoberta em 1631 da geometria analítica, que relaciona curvas geométricas com equações algébricas, é também o principal título de fama de Descartes como matemático. No entanto, não devemos superestimar a importância que esta descoberta teve para o próprio Descartes. Seu principal interesse era, em sua opinião, metodológico: permitia libertar a mente para simplificar as técnicas de cálculo. -/- Porque na matemática Descartes é compartilhado entre admiração pelo que eles permitem, e desprezo pelo que fazem com ele. A ideia de facilidade é o motivo comum dessa admiração e desprezo. Matemática é fácil, e sua virtude nos mostrar como o conhecimento é fácil, é fácil para o homem saber tudo o que ele pode saber, desde que o mesmo tenha tempo. Todavia, essa facilidade faz com que a atividade habitual dos matemáticos seja um pouco ridícula, a resolução de “problemas matemáticos”, que Descartes considerava como um mero divertimento, é dificilmente digna de consideração. É novamente em nome desse caso que Descartes mais uma vez repreende os antigos matemáticos por terem dado seus resultados mas obstruindo ou ocultando seu método, a fim de impressionar os crédulos, dificultando a aparência do que não é. O método está em contraste com o essencial do que pode ser aprendido com a matemática. -/- -/- Para identificar corretamente este método, é necessário abstrair os próprios objetos matemáticos (números, figuras etc.), que nos faz acreditar que a matemática é uma ciência especial ao lado das outras ciências, o que nos leva a uma divisão em ramos separados da mesma (aritmética, geometria, álgebra etc.). Então aparece uma matemática universal, consistindo no estudo de “vários relatórios ou proporções” que podem ser encontrados entre quaisquer objetos, para que possamos constituí-los em séries contínuas e deduzi-los uns dos outros, e chegar, daqueles que são conhecidos, àqueles que ainda não estão distantes, tão distantes como estão, tão ocultos como parecem ser. -/- Não há nada difícil em tal conhecimento, há apenas o simples e o complexo, e o tempo necessário para alcançar o complexo mediante o simples. Não há nada difícil porque não há nada oculto: se “conhecer” era a perigosa empreitada de se aventurar na dimensão secreta das coisas, seria necessário um gênio e o uso de poderes ocultos. Mas “conhecer” é um exercício do senso comum que direciona sua luz para tudo que pode esclarecer: é, portanto, suficiente para um método. -/- Nós todos sabemos que as primeiras verdades matemáticas são simples. Mas por que elas são? Porque elas nos contam tudo sem reservas, sem nada opaco, sobre tudo que estão falando e tratando: seu objeto é completamente iluminado, não há a necessidade de voltar à ele para aprofundá-lo indefinidamente, devemos passar para outro. Estas são representações estritamente adequadas ao que elas alegam, para representar o que Descartes denominou de ideais claras e distintas: claro, porque percebemos todos os elementos distintos, porque não podemos confundi-los com os outros. -/- Se a primeira verdade é considerada simples, a segunda, por sua vez, não parece ser assim. Seria, sem dúvida, considerada difícil, reservando uma parte do desconhecido se o enfrentássemos de frente. Mas é apenas complexo, isto é, só podemos entendê-lo depois de ter compreendido o primeiro, e depois entender que não há mais nada para entender no primeiro, e sim passar adiante: basta respeitar essa ordem, que é a ordem do nosso entendimento, para que seja também considerado uma ideia claro e distinta. -/- Até onde podemos prosseguir? Até o fim, de acordo com Descartes, até a conclusão do que podemos saber, uma vez que nossa mente, que agora é ordenada por nosso conhecimento, é limitada: limite claro, limite esse que não é misteriosamente abrigado no mundo ou na espessura da realidade. Abaixo desse limite, nosso conhecimento pode ser perfeito se for metódico. Abaixo do limite, nada oculto, nada profundo, tudo toma o seu lugar nas “longas cadeias de razões”; além do limite, nada escondido, apenas o que é não é nossa responsabilidade. -/- Se não há nada escondido, a realidade que conhecemos não vai além do que sabemos sobre ela. Logo, o método não é apenas uma maneira humana de pedir objetos a nossa conveniência: atribuindo-lhes o seu lugar em nossa ordem, tornando-os claros para nós, envolve-os em seu verdadeiro ser. A revolução cartesiana consiste, então, no fato de que as condições de nosso conhecimento definem a verdade do ser conhecido. -/- Não obstante, sempre perpetua-se uma “dificuldade”, que nada mais é do que o tempo. Se não há a necessidade de o gênio saber perfeitamente, leva tempo para ir do simples ao complexo. O homem só pode saber se tem tempo, muito tempo antes dele: essa preocupação para com a necessidade de tempo, retorna com uma obsessão sob a caneta e a perspectiva de Descartes. Essa necessidade, então, de ter tempo diferencia radicalmente, como veremos, o problema do conhecimento e da ação, da conduta a ser mantida na vida, da moralidade, uma vez que “as ações da vida muitas vezes não sofrem demora...”. -/- VI – REGRAS DO MÉTODO: OS QUATRO PRECEITOS -/- Podemos agora compreender os quatro preceitos aos quais, segundo Descartes, o método é reduzido (Discurso, segunda parte). -/- VI.I - Regra de evidência -/- O primeiro era de nunca aceitar coisa alguma como verdadeira sem que a conhecesse evidentemente como tal; ou seja, evitar cuidadosamente a precipitação e a prevenção, e não incluir em meus juízos nada além daquilo que se apresentasse tão clara e distintamente a meu espírito, que eu não tivesse nenhuma ocasião de pô-lo em dúvida (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). -/- Mesmo que sua declaração o duplique, é de fato um mesmo preceito acerca do que deve ser concebido como verdadeiro. Receber com método é esperar até que a coisa se apresente para ele: essa paciência, esse “cuidado”, remove os preconceitos característicos das ideias recebidas antes da hora, a precipitação e a prevenção que fazem parecer obscuro o que é o tempo. Se, nessa apresentação para ele, ele tomou um cuidado de aderir (nada mais) ao que é claro e distinto, é sem reserva que uma “coisa” pode ser recebida, sem poder surgir o risco, a “oportunidade”, de ter que voltar mais tarde: ele teria visto a sua verdade, e está evidência foi o suficiente para que ele pudesse duvidar disso. -/- VI.II - Regra de análise -/- “O segundo, dividir cada uma das dificuldades que examinasse em tantas parcelas quantas fosse possível e necessário para melhor resolvê-las” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). Ora, o que é apresentado como difícil de examinar, na verdade não o é, é apenas complexo, composto de múltiplas parcelas. Quantas parcelas? É a resolução da dificuldade que deve decidir essa questão: quando um matemático consegue estabelecer um teorema “difícil”, ligando-o às proposições mais simples por uma cadeia contínua de deduções, ele sabe que não há mais nada a saber em seu objeto, que contém exatamente tantas divisões quantas forem necessárias para formar está série. Logo, não precisamos nos preocupar com mais nada. -/- VI.III - Regra de ordem -/- O terceiro, conduzir por ordem meus pensamentos, começando pelos objetos mais simples e mais fáceis de conhecer , para subir pouco a pouco, como por degraus, até o conhecimento dos mais compostos; e supondo certa ordem mesmo entre aqueles que não se precedem naturalmente uns aos outros (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). -/- Essa é a ordem, de acordo com os pensamentos de Descartes, o que pode ser visto no fato de que, entre os objetos mais simples e os mais complexos, a distinção está na ordem de facilidade, isto é, os primeiros são os mais fáceis de saber, enquanto o segundo, por sua vez, só pode ser conhecido quando dominamos a totalidade do primeiro. O importante é passar de um para o outro como por graus, numa série contínua, sem estar diante de um hiato como o conhecimento prévio não seria suficiente para deixar claro o novo conhecimento. E desde que está ordem de razões, fixando cada objeto em seu devido lugar, nos entrega em sua totalidade, é também a ordem objetiva, a ordem dos próprios objetos, tanto que não devemos hesitar em supor isso entre eles, mesmo quando o modo como se apresentam não revela ordem. -/- VI.IV - Regra de enumeração -/- “E, o último, fazer em tudo enumerações tão completas, e revisões tão gerais, que eu tivesse certeza de nada omitir” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). Omitir alguma coisa séria destruir o próprio princípio da ordem das razões, uma vez que qualquer objeto só pode ser visto clara e distintamente se todos que o precederam também tiverem sido vistos em seu lugar. Se a dedução atingir este objeto, significa que nada foi omitido até então. Porém, quando a dedução torna-se muito longa, torna-se, também, mais difícil de mantê-la inteira, como deveria, sob o olhar da mente; somos então tentados a confiar apenas em sua memória. O preceito de enumeração não deve ser entendido como uma preocupação retrospectiva (certifique-se de que nada o tenha esquecido), mas no sentido atual, como os meios de manter em mente todas as evidências do passado necessárias para a evidência presente. Dos quatro preceitos do método, é o único a ter um caráter de técnica e não de simples higiene: é aqui que se confronta a única dificuldade real do conhecimento, o fato de que leva tempo, e sua consequência, recorrer à memória, à faculdade pela qual as velhas ideias descartenses foram “concebidas em sua dívida”. -/- -/- VII – O MÉTODO EXIGE UM FUNDAMENTO METAFÍSICO -/- O método permite responder à uma questão: do que tenho certeza? É certo que homens que seguem ideias aceitas também conhecem esse estado psicológico chamado “certeza”. Todavia, entre esse estado psicológico e a verdadeira certeza do conhecimento metódico, há uma diferença de que o primeiro está imune a “oportunidades” de duvidar, já que ele não tem autoconfiança. Toda oportunidade de dúvida que se apresenta transformaria essa “certeza” em incerteza: por isso que é sensato duvidar em princípio das opiniões recebidas, sem esperar, por assim dizer, oportunidades de duvidar, e decretar antecipadamente seu conteúdo incerto, não necessariamente substituí-lo por outro conteúdo, mas aceitar apenas o que lhe fora assegurado. -/- Poderia ser o mesmo com a certeza do conhecimento metódico? Pode ser apresentado a ele como uma oportunidade para duvidar, e seria sábio também duvidá-lo antecipadamente, submetendo-o a uma dúvida de princípio? Seria então uma dúvida muito diferente da anterior. Descartes exclamou que: “Se alguma vez duvidei um dia do que me aperfeiçoei seguramente, tal dúvida deveria permanecer fora da certeza: não a destruiria, nem mesmo a enfraqueceria, a colocaria em suspenso no vazio; ele não sugeriria para mim que eu talvez esteja menos certo do que pensava, mas sim que posso estar errado em ter tanta certeza. Eu vou manter minha certeza enquanto duvidoso, porque não haveria nenhuma esperança para eu encontrar melhor do que ela: minha única esperança seria descobrir que ela é verdadeiramente fundamentada, que eu confio com razão, e não porque eu não posso contrário.” -/- Mas por que uma oportunidade para duvidar dessa maneira? A própria razão, na medida em que é incontestavelmente autoritária, deve levantar essa dúvida por sua própria autoridade. É porque é autoritária que tem o direito de se perguntar sobre o que o autoriza, sobre o que o investe com tal autoridade. Afinal, a certeza de sua autoridade é uma certeza, que não pode ser classificada entre as certezas que ela nos ensina, uma vez que reconhecemos essa autoridade. -/- Por isso, é importante encontrar, para essa certeza, um fundamento para abrigá-lo, de uma vez por todas, desta suspeita sobre si mesmo. A busca por esse fundamento deve ser metódica, mas deve ao mesmo tempo abalar nossa confiança no método, a fim de encontrar o que o justifica. Essa busca paradoxal é o que Descartes denomina de "metafísica". Desdobra-se principalmente nas seis Meditações da Primeira Filosofia de 1641, geralmente chamadas de Meditações Metafísicas. Seu exame pode ser dividido em duas partes: -/- • o primeiro diz respeito à dúvida e ao seu trabalho; • o segundo diz respeito à fundação de certas ciências, ou seja, a existência de um Deus verdadeiro. -/- REFERENCIAL TEÓRICO -/- DESCARTES, R. Discurso do método. Trad. Maria Ermantina Galvão. 2ª ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1996. ______________. Discurso do método. Coleção Os pensadores, vol. XV. Trad. J. Guinsburg e Bento Prado Jr. 1ª ed. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1973. -/- Estimule a criatividade, respeite o direito autoral. -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva © 2019. (shrink)

If there is an area of discourse in which disagreement is virtually absent, it is mathematics. After all, mathematicians justify their claims with deductive proofs: arguments that entail their conclusions. But is mathematics really exceptional in this respect? Looking at the history and practice of mathematics, we soon realize that it is not. First, deductive arguments must start somewhere. How should we choose the starting points (i.e., the axioms)? Second, mathematicians, like the rest of us, are fallible. Their ability to (...) recognize whether a putative proof is correct is not infallible. In most cases, disagreement over the correctness of a putative proof is, however, evanescent. Once an error is spotted and communicated, the disagreement disappears. But this is not always the case. Sometimes it is recalcitrant; that is, it persists over time. In order to zoom in on this type of disagreement and explain its very possibility, we focus on a single case study: a decades-long (1921-1949) controversy between Federigo Enriques and Francesco Severi, two prominent exponents of the Italian school of algebraic geometry. We suggest that the instability of the mathematical community to which they belonged can be explained by the gap between an abstract criterion of rigor and local criteria of acceptability. It is this instability that made the existence of recalcitrant disagreement over putative proofs possible. We do not condemn speculative mathematics but rather its pretense of being rigorous mathematics. In this respect, we show that the overly self-confident Severi and the more intuitive, visionary Enriques had a completely different attitude. (shrink)