[FOM] Why inclusive disjunction?

Charles Silver silver_1 at mindspring.com
Wed Jan 10 08:55:40 EST 2007

On Jan 9, 2007, at 10:38 PM, John Baldwin wrote:

> 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?

	It looks to me that the set consisting of the "exclusive or" and  
"not" is not "adequate" (in the sense of all truth functions being  
definable from just these two), while the standard set {~, v} is  
adequate (as well as several other sets of connectives).  Perhaps,  
though, this would not be a "principled reason".

Charlie Silver

More information about the FOM mailing list