1
From: "Human Potential & Development."
Split Justification: Development fundamentally involves both our inner landscape (**Internal World**) and our interaction with everything outside us (**External World**). (Ref: Subject-Object Distinction)..
2
From: "External World (Interaction)"
Split Justification: All external interactions fundamentally involve either other human beings (social, cultural, relational, political) or the non-human aspects of existence (physical environment, objects, technology, natural world). This dichotomy is mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive.
3
From: "Interaction with the Non-Human World"
Split Justification: All human interaction with the non-human world fundamentally involves either the cognitive process of seeking knowledge, meaning, or appreciation from it (e.g., science, observation, art), or the active, practical process of physically altering, shaping, or making use of it for various purposes (e.g., technology, engineering, resource management). These two modes represent distinct primary intentions and outcomes, yet together comprehensively cover the full scope of how humans engage with the non-human realm.
4
From: "Understanding and Interpreting the Non-Human World"
Split Justification: Humans understand and interpret the non-human world either by objectively observing and analyzing its inherent structures, laws, and phenomena to gain factual knowledge, or by subjectively engaging with it to derive aesthetic value, emotional resonance, or existential meaning. These two modes represent distinct intentions and methodologies, yet together comprehensively cover all ways of understanding and interpreting the non-human world.
5
From: "Understanding Objective Realities"
Split Justification: Humans understand objective realities either through empirical investigation of the physical and biological world and its governing laws, or through the deductive exploration of abstract structures, logical rules, and mathematical principles. These two domains represent fundamentally distinct methodologies and objects of study, yet together encompass all forms of objective understanding of non-human reality.
6
From: "Understanding Formal Systems and Principles"
Split Justification: Humans understand formal systems and principles either by focusing on the abstract study of quantity, structure, space, and change (e.g., arithmetic, geometry, algebra, calculus), or by focusing on the abstract study of reasoning, inference, truth, algorithms, and information processing (e.g., formal logic, theoretical computer science). These two domains represent distinct yet exhaustive categories of formal inquiry.
7
From: "Understanding Logical and Computational Systems"
Split Justification: Humans understand logical and computational systems either by focusing on the abstract rules and structures that govern valid inference, truth, and formal argumentation, or by focusing on the abstract principles and methods that govern information processing, problem-solving procedures, and the limits of computation. These two domains represent distinct yet exhaustive categories within the study of logical and computational systems.
8
From: "Understanding Formal Logic and Deductive Reasoning"
Split Justification: Formal logic and deductive reasoning fundamentally involve two distinct yet inseparable dimensions: the abstract rules and structures governing the formation and transformation of logical expressions and arguments (syntax, proof theory), and the meaning, truth conditions, and interpretation of these expressions in relation to various models or realities (semantics, model theory). These two areas represent distinct methodologies and objects of study within logic, yet together they comprehensively cover the entire scope of understanding formal logic.
9
From: "Understanding Logical Syntax and Proof Theory"
Split Justification: The understanding of logical syntax and proof theory fundamentally divides into two distinct yet complementary areas. The first involves grasping the abstract rules that govern the correct formation and internal structure of individual logical expressions (e.g., propositions, predicates), defining what constitutes a well-formed statement within a formal language. The second involves understanding the systematic rules of inference and axiomatic frameworks that allow for the step-by-step transformation of these expressions into valid sequences of reasoning, culminating in formal proofs and arguments. One defines the building blocks of the formal language, while the other defines how to construct valid arguments from those building blocks.
10
From: "Understanding the Formal Structure of Logical Expressions"
Split Justification: The formal structure of logical expressions is fundamentally defined by two distinct yet complementary components. The first involves understanding the basic, atomic building blocks – the alphabet, symbols, and vocabulary from which expressions are constructed (e.g., propositional variables, predicate symbols, logical connectives, quantifiers). The second involves understanding the systematic rules and grammar that dictate how these lexical elements can be legitimately combined to form well-formed, valid logical expressions. These two aspects are mutually exclusive (one defines the parts, the other defines their assembly) and comprehensively exhaustive, together fully describing the syntax and internal structure of any formal logical expression.
11
From: "Understanding the Lexical Elements of Formal Logic"
Split Justification: The lexical elements of any formal logical system fundamentally consist of two distinct categories: those symbols whose meaning and interpretation are fixed and inherent to the logic itself, defining its operational structure and inferential rules (e.g., logical connectives, quantifiers, punctuation), and those symbols whose meaning is assigned by a specific domain or interpretation, representing particular entities, properties, or relations within that context (e.g., individual constants, variables, predicate symbols, function symbols). These categories are mutually exclusive, as a symbol belongs to one or the other based on its fixed or variable semantic role, and together they comprehensively cover all fundamental building blocks of a formal logical language.
12
From: "Understanding Non-Logical Symbols"
Split Justification: ** The understanding of non-logical symbols fundamentally divides into those symbols whose primary role is to designate or stand for individual entities within the domain of discourse (whether as specific constants or general variables), and those symbols whose primary role is to represent attributes of entities, relationships between entities, or operations that transform entities into other entities. These two categories are mutually exclusive, as a non-logical symbol performs one role or the other, and comprehensively exhaustive, together covering all non-logical symbols used in a formal logical language.
✓
Topic: "Understanding Symbols Referring to Properties, Relations, and Functions" (W7218)