Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 132
- 1
What is this place?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
If in doubt, please post it!
Rules
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Does the Motte have any recommendations if I want to educate myself on formal logic?
I'm considering getting this textbook, but just because some random youtube video recommended it, I don't really know what else there is on the market.
I really like Boolos and Jeffrey's "Computability and Logic", although that would probably count as a second course. What level of background knowledge do you already have?
I have very little background in it currently. I've dabbled a little bit in some analytic philosophy which uses it and after I got a degree in a humanities field I learned to code and got a job which exposes me to a little bit of CS every now and then. Basically, both in philosophy and CS I've come across use of formal logic a bit, but I've never actually had to do anything with it myself. It did however produce a lingering interest in the topic which is why I'm now intending to get a proper understanding of it. So I reckon I'm probably better off starting with an introductory book, but I'll take note of your recommendation in case I am motivated to delve deeper after working through an introductory book. Thanks for the recommendation!
The preface says: "Computability and Logic is intended for the student in philosophy or pure or applied mathematics who has mastered the material ordinarily covered in a first course in logic and who wishes to advance his or her acquaintance with the subject. The aim of the book is to present the principal fundamental theoretical results about logic, and to cover certain other meta-logical results whose proofs are not easily obtainable elsewhere."
I find the style to be more chatty and less dry than most mathematical texts, presumably to cater for the philosophy students. The main prerequisite is an understanding of first-order logic. The Wikipedia page for "First-order logic" looks pretty good.
Thanks, it certainly seems like the book deals with precisely the sorts of things I'm interested in.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link