3 state logic

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.          me in the setting of which i thunk this thought →
.
might have been woman on the right who lent me the pen to draw the diagram … #thanks → don’t know your name
The binary shuffel between true and false in our classical logic is but a human invention.  We could just have well chosen a 3 way shuffel.  I engaged with an interesting conversation about this on the sci.logic newsgroup around the turn of the century ← .  I come in quite a bit down in the conversation.  I wonder what Niek  Sparkel is up to now … he used to draw the most incrediable diagrams … i wish i had saved some of them.  His name seems to have dissapeard from the face of the earth.
 

The third logical value could be interpreted as being completely orthogonal to
{true, false}.  I like to think of it as "Surprised", which  interpretation has
certain tangible correlates in human experience.  In other words this value could be
saying, not that we do not know the truth value of a variable, but rather that
the truth value of the variable is irrelevant, and might not ever be known.
For example: Have you stopped beating your grandmother?  Does the barber of
Cavill shave himself?

seth ~ 1999

The third state could be just completely different than true&false, (orghogonal as i said) … so if #SurpriseRings then #RingsTrue is irrelivant. 

I never managed to establish a  “truth” table for 3 state logic for the various logical functions, like AND, OR, IMPLICATION, NEGATION.  I had this feeling that Nike could have done it, be we didn’t manage to connnect with that.  I did implement this in #CyberMind to good avail … it did break attention out of a true/false suffell.  I think i just scratched the surface. 

apparently sci.logic is still an active forum.


tag #ThreeStateLogic 

Comments



Didn’t you have 3 state logic way before 1999? Like in CyberMind circa 1982?

yep.  and i think we just scratched the surface of what it would do.

woopse … where did it go?

I switched to thought top relative … should make things easier now. Sorry … still beta feature.

Just move them where you want again.


p.s. on your widgetizing … once the thought editor is inline too, then it will be much easier to align thought content with the widgets … you won’t have to trial and error it. But getting to the work of the thought inline editor will be a bit of a journey, lots of stuff to unravel, so unsure when it will happen.


… and so’s you know the ravel … it’s not just the editing surface, if that is all it was, I could make the switch in minutes. The conversion issue is all the stuff in the frame surrounding the current thought editor … the title, about stuff, checkboxes, alternate publish and update buttons, etc. The biggest issue with the change is figuring out how to make all those ubiquitous and ergonomic and fit in well with all the rest in an inline format.


#LOL … I see you are starting to get the feel for what is possible with this … and see how it goes beyond cartoons about as much as Saturn with her rings is beyond the Moon.  

Unlimited possibilities for presentation!