Insights Blog
-- Browse All Articles --
Physics Articles
Physics Tutorials
Physics Guides
Physics FAQ
Math Articles
Math Tutorials
Math Guides
Math FAQ
Education Articles
Education Guides
Bio/Chem Articles
Technology Guides
Computer Science Tutorials
Forums
General Math
Calculus
Differential Equations
Topology and Analysis
Linear and Abstract Algebra
Differential Geometry
Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Trending
Featured Threads
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
General Math
Calculus
Differential Equations
Topology and Analysis
Linear and Abstract Algebra
Differential Geometry
Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Mathematics
General Math
Difference between Constructive proof and Existential Generalization?
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="stevendaryl, post: 6016661, member: 372855"] There are many varieties of constructive logic, but most of them can be thought of as placing additional restrictions on classical logic. So every rule of constructive logic is also a rule of classical logic, but not vice-versa. Both constructive logic and classical logic consider existential generalization valid.In contrast, constructive logic does not consider ##\exists x F(x)## equivalent to ##\neg \forall x \neg F(x)##, while classically, they are equivalent. So it's not that constructive logic has a special way to prove existential statements, it's that classical logic has additional (nonconstructive) ways to prove them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Post reply
Forums
Mathematics
General Math
Difference between Constructive proof and Existential Generalization?
Back
Top