Stream: Archive Mirror: Isabelle Users Mailing List

Topic: [isabelle] "natural deduction" vs. Gentzen-style


view this post on Zulip Email Gateway (Aug 22 2022 at 13:45):

From: Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de>
Hi,
IIUC what's called "natural deduction" dates back to Gentzen.
Hence suggest to call it Gentzen-style. These proceedings are by no way
natural, but artificial.
When rules are declared natural, people tend to believe it in a
religion-like way - no longer disposed to throw away and replace the
model if not suitable.
Cheers,
Andreas

view this post on Zulip Email Gateway (Aug 22 2022 at 13:45):

From: Joachim Breitner <breitner@kit.edu>
Dear Andreas,

I wholeheartedly agree that “natural style deduction” is a misnomer,
and it is far from natural to draw these trees, or alternatively these
strangle indented text lines with numbers and possibly vertical bars.

I recommend you look at http://incredible.pm/ which is an incredibly
natural way of doing proofs!

It is also more fun than worrying about names.

Cheers,
Joachim
signature.asc

view this post on Zulip Email Gateway (Aug 22 2022 at 13:45):

From: Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de>
Hallo Joachim,

was introduced to your work thanks to our meetup in Berlin:
http://www.meetup.com/Logic-Types-and-Programs/events/231039680/

Really should learn from your tuning of the haskell-compiler still. ;)

Well, have some questions which would apply to many of logical systems
nowadays: The most crucial probably is deriving from bottom --which
equals to false IIUC-- Start of Session 4.

A

If this is permitted, everything is derivable. Where would it make sense?

Cheers,

Andreas,
who still tries to reconcile his stomach with logic


Last updated: Nov 21 2024 at 12:39 UTC