I never progressed much beyond first-order statement calculus, but it seems to me that the key is in the qualification, "In every situation (of some desired type), if A, then B". This implies (in a non-Boolean sense :) ) that we have an additional operator in the statement, one that is not and is not intended to be included in IF/THEN.
We might draw an analogy of the procedural instantiation of IF/THEN(/ELSE) in computer languages. The usage isn't equivalent to that of Boolean algebra, but BA isn't supposed to be procedural, but to quantify (or describe) static relationships. "Strict implication" isn't procedural either, I don't think, but it seems to be closer.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 07:56 pm (UTC)We might draw an analogy of the procedural instantiation of IF/THEN(/ELSE) in computer languages. The usage isn't equivalent to that of Boolean algebra, but BA isn't supposed to be procedural, but to quantify (or describe) static relationships. "Strict implication" isn't procedural either, I don't think, but it seems to be closer.