[FOM] Why inclusive disjunction?
ablass at umich.edu
Thu Jan 11 09:01:13 EST 2007
Richard Heck wrote:
> Inclusive or certainly is far simpler to work with. It's
> associative, for one thing,
Exclusive or is also associative. But iterating it produces a parity
connective; that is "p exclusive-or q exclusive-or r exclusive-or ...
exclusive-or z" is true just when the number of true constituents
among p, q, r, ... z is odd. Might the more pleasant result of
iterating inclusive or have something to do with our preference for
it? Or maybe the monotonicity of inclusive or makes it more pleasant?
More information about the FOM