Talk:Logical conjunction

message: I removed this:
: In electronic circuits, TRUE is often represented by a higher voltage level - positive logic, and is denoted by the symbol 1. Its complement, FALSE is then denoted by 0.
since it's really about electronic circuits.
— Toby 19:47 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)
And I removed the 0's and 1's from the truth table and substituted the actual truth values "T" and "F"; this also makes this article consistent with the Wiki article on truth tables.Warren Platts (talk) 15:53, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: electronics circuits

message: I'm not sure about this as a section heading. "English connectives and logical conjunction" seems a lot clearer and less medieval. The section is, after all, about the relationship of English connectives to logical conjunction.  Furthermore, the sentence 'Natural languages are evolved for many purposes beyond their use in logical argumentation, and so any study of logic in a natural language context must sort out those aspects of natural language that are pertinent to its use in logic and those that are not." seems to imply that all distinctions between NL connectives and 1-0-0-0  logical conjunction are irrelevant to logic. Not every logician would agree.  Jon Awbrey, your thoughts? Adrian Mander
Edit: just got a proper account. adrianmander
Double edit: sorry for meefy formatting.
JA: Strictly speaking, English connective, more generally, grammatical connective, refers to a linguistic form that connects words or word groups, with no reference to a potential logical meaning, if any.  One cannot speak of its intended interpretation without passing to logical considerations, and one cannot speak of the different ways of making that passage without engaging in what is properly still called either pragmatics or rhetoric.  Jon Awbrey 23:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rhetorical considerations

message: Everyone should vote.
Democracy is the best system of government.
Therefore, everyone should vote and democracy is the best system of government.
This is not a good example because the two propositions are open to debate. In fact they both reflect a particularly American POV.
A less contentious example should be substituted, e.g.:
The sky is overcast.
Rain is falling.
Therefore the sky is overcast and rain is falling.
--84.9.78.198 12:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example 

message: I have been working on all of the logical operators recently. I would like to see a consistent format for them. There is a wikiproject proposal for this at:
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Logical_Operators. Also see Talk:Logical connective.
I would like to see the logical, grammatical, mathematical, and computer science applications of all of the operators on the single page for each of those concepts. 
Gregbard 08:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed project 

message: Why would and/or merge here?  And/or is a logical disjunction, not a conjunction anyway.  Unless there's strong opposition, I'm removing the tags. Oren0 16:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger? 

message: Consider this paragraph:
The word "and" can also serve as a logical disjunction (called OR in logic), e.g. "Damage caused by scratches and dents is not reimbursable," when what is meant is that damage cause by one or the other isn't reimbursable. This overload of meaning on "and" happens when the word is used to amplify "or"; the second sentence, on an insurance contract, looks and reads weak. In the same way "or" can be used to mean AND: the sentence "It might work, or it might not" is equivalent to "It might work, and it might not".
I think it should go.  The first sentence IS a conjunction.  To me, it reads "damage caused by scratches is not reimbursable AND damage caused by dents is not reimbursable."  Interpreting it as the article does is just an application of DeMorgan's Law.  Additionally, the sentence "it might work, or it might not" is a logical disjunction plain and simple.  Logically, the sentence "it might work, and it might not" is false. Oren0 16:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  And meaning or? 

message: I'm reading Susanna S. Epp Discrete Mathematics with Applications (Third Edition) and they use an upside down logical disjunction symbol for logical conjunction. What's up with that? --ScWizard (talk) 02:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean \land? — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  My textbook uses a different symbol 

message: Can we put only the necessary ones first then state the rest as corollaries? Right distributivity, "falsehood preserving" are derivable from the others. 118.90.6.70 (talk) 10:16, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Properties 

message: The Natural Language is completely messed up. I am going to completely rewrite it unless someone objects soon. For example, it may be the case that there is an implied order to "They got married and they had children", but it's not at all clear that the "and" is what is carrying the weight of the implied order, as evidenced by the reverse "They had children and they got married". The latter is an awkward phrasing because it's not clear that the children did in fact precede the marriage; one would rather say "They had children and then they got married" in order to convey the surprising order. In "They got married and they had children", the order is not conveyed by the "and" but is instead conveyed by the fact that children after marriage is the "natural" temporal order.
What would be more useful would be discussion about how several English conjunctions, e.g., 'p and q', 'p in addition to q', 'p but q', 'p however q', 'p although q', 'p nevertheless q', 'p including q' may all have differing connotations, they all function similarly in terms of the propositional logic truth function "p ∧ q".
Warren Platts (talk) 16:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Natural Language 

message: What does "(to be tested)" exactly mean? --Backinstadiums (talk) 10:50, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  (to be tested) 

message: "This can be used to select part of a bitstring using a bit mask. For example, 10011101 AND 00001000  =  00001000 extracts the fourth bit of an 8-bit bitstring."
Shouldn't this state the fourth but, not the fifth? I submitted an edit, but it appears to have published. It's my first edit ever on Wikipedia, so had assumed it would be added to a queue.
Apologies! FletcherEricIAm (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fourth bit, not fifth?