Logic: Conditional statement “if” as tracking signal

The previous post is about conditional statement as true statement maker. This post is for more practice aspect, as tracking signal.


The images:

This is a CGI after searching “if” in the research paper.




The basic:

It’s obvious that explicit statements clarify the meaning. “if ~ then” statements clarify division of premises and inferences.


The usages:

“if” signal says that you can change the premise. So you are allowed to change it for free.

Assumptions are often used for fill points lacking evidences. So it provides weak point signal of the argument.


The benefits:

The benefits from the point of view is similar with Wikipedia or Github.


Using the “if” signals, you can look backward when you have something to check or modify.

Branching logic:

The “if” branches record history of inferences. You can extend or change the logical tree afterward.


Of course, by sharing the tree, other persons can take over the logic.


The applications:

For science/risk communication:

There are two radial positions in science and risk communication.
One is to explain science to citizens as though there is no place to doubt.
The other is to explain science community as the same corruptive and untrustworthy group as religious groups.

Meaningful science/risk communication needs to share what is the actual weak point with lacking evidence.
Conditional statements could be the format for that. It can even provide visualization of tree of scientific thinkings.


For political communication as engineer:

Making data along with format is nice for communication with different culture or political thoughts.
Engineer can communicate each other even they have different language because they shares toolkit to make things and format to describe it.

Since it is similar with drawing design paper of a building or an electric circuit, you could discuss political idea not by your heart, but by blueprint of logic.


Strong brief on conditional statement:

In many discussions, people tend to loose condition for show strong brief.
For example, a person may say “democracy is absolutely needed!”. What this guy actually wanted to say may be his strong brief for value of democracy. If he really say democracy is needed, he can say what condition make it needed, and check the condition is true.

This type of rhetoric could contaminate logic with brief.
Formatted conditional statement can block the wrong mixture.


The data format:

It should have existential and universal quantification other than “if”.
And typical set of proofing logic with sequence of experiment data.

The pen object is mcswainy’s Red and Black Plastic Pen.

Leave a Reply