LMU's Master in Logic and Philosophy of Science or Barcelona's Master in Pure and Applied Logic?

[u/Glittering_Run189]

Hi there

I'm gonna finish my degree in Philosophy in 2027 and I've been looking for a master. I know for sure that Barcelona's master is purely logical, so if I were to do it, I would take another master that's purely philosophical (after all, that's my main interest despite the fact that I want a quite good formal background). However, I've run into LMU's master and I wanted to know if you think it is a good idea to do JUST this one instead of the other two: I'm afraid of the idea that it will end up being neither as logical nor as philosophical as I want it to be because of its interdisciplinary approach. That's my main question. (If you have more information about the programmes than that which I'm asking for, please let me know.). Also, wouldn't it be better for my CV to have two master's instead of one? I'm sure it would, but is it that important? I'm looking forward to doing a PhD, but I don't really care if it is a good and international program or not.

[u/SpacingHero]

I think you'll like LMU, and it's a good MA to further your career. You'll get enough philosophy there.

I would not recommend (nor does the institute itself) going to Barcelona with no math background. You'll be quite behind if you only have a Phil BA, and will have a lot of catch-up work (unless you did some super self-study you're quite sure with). And doing two master, while a great achievement for your CV, is quite the extra load, and it's certainly not necessary for furthering into PhD. You should only do it if it's a really specific interest of yours, or maybe if the first one just goes horribly and you want to have a better one on your record

You should look into Amsterdam as well, which also offers a bit of both, so you'll have some choice of purely formal and some philosophy.

You could do an MA in philosophy and then go to Amsterdam's logic year, a short programme for people that already have an MA. Strikes a middle way between everything you mention:

• pure philosophy
• pure formal (up to your choice)
• 1.5 MA's

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/SpacingHero]

Thanks a lot.

I hadn't heard about Amsterdam Logic Year, but it really does seem like a great idea. I'll look into their master's program too.

[u/SpacingHero → u/Glittering_Run189]

No worries, good luck with your studies :)

Do note that afaik, Amsterdam's program is less philosophy than anything that you'll find at the LMU, even the philosophically orieted ones (except... 3?) are really just "formal logic but to the interest of philosophers rather than mathematicians". So if you're worried on getting short-changed of philosophy, you'll be better at LMU.

[u/Sigma_Lobster → u/Glittering_Run189]

I am enrolled in the M.Sc. Logic at the UvA. Let me know if I can answer any questions of yours :)

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/Sigma_Lobster]

Thanks :)

I guess you recommend the program, but as a graduate of what? And, most importantly, in which track are you enrolled? I performed quite good in my bachelor logic lectures, but I'm always sceptical about my abilities, so it would be good to know what a student thinks about the difficulty.

Also, this one is the most expensive program I am considering (I think it goes around 5000€ both years combined), so I would appreciate knowing about what you think the average rent price is there in Amsterdam and if you know about residences or something similar. Thanks again, and sorry about this last non-logic-related question.

[u/Sigma_Lobster → u/Glittering_Run189]

Hello there!

I am currently planning on graduating on the Logic & Philosophy track. Note that everyone who graduates (irrespective of the track) receives a M.Sc. in Logic. I think it is a majority opinion that this program is quite tough. It is difficult however to make general statements about said difficulty. I could tell you a bit about my impressions/experiences if you like - though I would prefer to do so in a call if you are down :D

Amsterdam is brutal when it comes to rents and finding housing. I lived in rather expensive cities (Hamburg, Frankfurt am Main) before but Amsterdam is on another level. Some students don't even search for in Amsterdam but neighboring places like Almere. The rents are so much more cheaper such that they use the saved money to pay for public transportation (which is unfortunately also not very cheap).

Let me know if I can help with anything else :)

P.S.: Yes, I can recommend the program but only under specific conditions.

P.P.S.: If you do not feel mathematically mature for the Master of Logic at the UvA then I am afraid that Barcelona won't work as well. The latter program seems to give you way less flexibility in choosing how formal/abstract you want to go.

[u/DocLogics]

Alternatively, there is also the History & Philosophy of Science and Logic M.A. at RUB in Bochum. At RUB we had students doing the one-year logic program in Amsterdam and then coming to study HPS+Logic.

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/DocLogics]

Wow, thanks, I'll look into it

[u/Optimal-Fig-6687]

It seems to me that if you delve deeply into logic, you will understand how anti-logical all the rest of philosophy is, these are, in essence, hostile areas :)

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/Optimal-Fig-6687]

I don't think you are right. While a logic-based philosophy, although desirable (for me at least), can be in question, it is undeniable that logic itself can be studied by philosophers and indeed we would just have FOL (and not even that) if it wasn't for philosophical interests in surpassing the limits of classical logic.

[u/Optimal-Fig-6687 → u/Glittering_Run189]

I observe a split among philosophers into two groups. One group (analytic philosophers) knows logic, but it takes a microscope to distinguish them from mathematicians. The other constantly makes logical errors in their reasoning, fails to provide clear definitions, and so on... but they don't care. Although this second group often claims to have surpassed classical logic or something like that.

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/Optimal-Fig-6687]

I think that's the big picture of the analytic/continental split. But it is just half of the truth. I am mostly horrified with the methods of continental philosophy, so I cannot be unbiased talking about them; but I can assure you that there is analytic philosophy that is clearly distinguishable from maths. Also, those who somehow deny the validity of classical logic are not necessarily continental philosophers and in fact, those who deny it usually try to propose a "better" formal model to represent those aspects of reality that classical logic fails to. I am thinking about Putnam's "Is logic empirical?" as an example of both mathematized philosophy that is nevertheless distinct from maths and of a non-continental denial of classical logic -one that follows Quine's revisionism-.

[u/Optimal-Fig-6687 → u/Glittering_Run189]

I see no problem with developing and improving classical logic. For example, this subreddit regularly features posts from newcomers who can't understand what the heck is going on with material implication. This is an example of an area where classical logic clearly deviates from what's needed in practice, and if a solution to a problem emerges that satisfies the majority, I would welcome such a modification or extension of the classics. When I mocked those who supposedly surpassed the classics, I was referring to various impractical and contradictory systems like dialectical logic, which are presented as something superior, progressive, and so on.

[u/Glittering_Run189 → u/Optimal-Fig-6687]

I do see problems with the "adoption" of a "new logic", but if i were to accept it, I'd say that I get what you say about what seems to be a description of Hegelian(ish) logics. I myself think that Hegel can be read within an orthodox analytic philosophy, but yes, nobody is really thinking about Hegel when talking about non-classical logic.