Noob needs help understanding what is an axiom.

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter General_Sax
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Axiom Noob
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

An axiom is a foundational proposition in logic that is accepted without proof, serving as a basis for deducing further truths. The discussion clarifies that axioms do not need to be self-evident; they can be established by consensus for the sake of argument. For example, one might assume the existence of unicorns as an axiom to explore their usefulness. The importance of consistency among multiple axioms is emphasized, as contradictions undermine the logical system.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic logical principles
  • Familiarity with propositional logic
  • Knowledge of the concept of theorems and proofs
  • Awareness of logical consistency and contradictions
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the role of axioms in formal systems
  • Explore the relationship between axioms and theorems
  • Learn about Gödel's incompleteness theorems
  • Investigate different logical systems and their axiomatic foundations
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, mathematicians, logicians, and students of formal logic will benefit from this discussion, particularly those interested in the foundations of logical reasoning and the nature of axioms.

General_Sax
Messages
445
Reaction score
0
Wikipedia says this: "In traditional logic, an axiom or postulate is a proposition that is not proved or demonstrated but considered to be either self-evident, or subject to necessary decision. Therefore, its truth is taken for granted, and serves as a starting point for deducing and inferring other (theory dependent) truths."

I don't understand this part: "... or subject to necessary decision".

So, one can "create" an axiom that isn't self-evident? How does that work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think they just mean, you decide its true--even if just for the sake of an argument. We're getting into just the semantics of it, the important part is that an axiom is any truth taken as a priori.

An axiom doesn't have to actually be true. For instance, if we're debating the usefulness of unicorns, we might take as an axiom the existence of unicorns--just so we can discuss what we're really interested in: whether or not they're useful.
 
General_Sax said:
I don't understand this part: "... or subject to necessary decision".

So, one can "create" an axiom that isn't self-evident? How does that work?

"Self-evident" is old fashioned, boring and uncool. "Consistency" is where it's at. You never write down just one axiom. You write several, and together with a set of rules of inference, you go ahead and prove theorems. The theorems may or may not mean anything (that is, they may or may not have an interpretation) but they can be proved with the small caveat that you can't also prove the theorem's negation. If you can, that's called a contradiction, and your whole system falls apart. Of course, sometimes that's what you want because your aim might be to show your axioms are not consistent. You can do this but can't prove your axioms are consistent unless you embed your logic into a higher logic where your axioms effectively become theorems in that higher logic (and then your "axioms" can be shown to be consistent if and only if the higher logic's axioms are consistent).

Clear?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
11K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
7K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
10K
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
11K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K