formal-logic
From the author
Formal and informal logic for philosophical reasoning. Covers propositional logic (connectives, truth tables, tautologies), predicate logic (quantifiers, validity), syllogistic logic (Aristotle's original forms), natural deduction (introduction/elimination rules), modal logic (necessity, possibility, possible worlds), and a catalog of 15+ informal fallacies. Use when analyzing arguments, identifying logical form, evaluating validity and soundness, or detecting fallacious reasoning.
Install
npx skills add Tibsfox/gsd-skill-creator --skill formal-logic -a claude-code
Installs to .claude/skills/formal-logic/ · Each command fetches the skill straight from GitHub with the open skills CLI.
No download: this skill’s licence (Custom or unclear) does not let us redistribute its files. The install commands fetch them from GitHub instead.
Want your agent to suggest skills while you type? See how to use skills from your IDE.
Safety checks on SKILL.md
No warnings.
Why 72
aiqbench computes the trust score from public signals. It is not a security audit, so read a skill before you install it.
Similar skills
Closest to this one by what they do and when they are used.
- propositional-logicparcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3Problem-solving strategies for propositional logic in mathematical logicOther★ 3.9K
- predicate-logicTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorFirst-order logic with quantifiers, predicates, functions, and identity. Covers syntax, interpretation over a domain, the universal and existential quantifiers, quantifier scope and binding, translation from natural language with multi-variable predicates, natural deduction for quantifiers, undecidability at first order, and the soundness/completeness theorems. Use when propositional logic is insufficient -- whenever "for all" or "there exists" matters to the argument.Other★ 71
- modal-logicTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorExtending propositional and predicate logic with modal operators -- necessity and possibility, and their relatives (obligation, knowledge, belief, time). Covers Kripke possible-worlds semantics, accessibility relations, the main modal systems (K, T, S4, S5), translation from natural language, and applications in epistemic, deontic, and temporal reasoning. Use when ordinary logic is insufficient to capture distinctions like "must" vs "might," "knows" vs "believes," "always" vs "sometimes."Other★ 71
- philosophical-theologyTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorPhilosophical theology — the use of philosophical tools to analyze and evaluate theological claims. Covers classical arguments for and against the existence of God (cosmological, ontological, teleological, moral, evil), the divine attributes (simplicity, omniscience, omnipotence, eternity, impassibility), the relation of faith and reason, religious epistemology, and the boundary between natural theology and revealed theology. Use when a query asks whether a theological claim is rationally defensible, how a divine attribute should be understood, or how philosophical frameworks across traditions have engaged religious questions.Other★ 71
- informal-fallaciesTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorCatalog of informal fallacies with definitions, canonical examples, and detection heuristics. Covers relevance fallacies (ad hominem, straw man, red herring, appeal to authority, appeal to emotion), presumption fallacies (false dichotomy, complex question, begging the question), ambiguity fallacies (equivocation, amphiboly, accent), causal fallacies (post hoc, slippery slope, correlation-causation), and statistical fallacies (hasty generalization, cherry-picking). Use when evaluating arguments for rhetorical or informal reasoning errors.Marketing★ 71
- mathematical-proof-logicTibsfox/gsd-skill-creatorThe logical structure of mathematical proof -- how first-order logic, natural deduction, and semantic reasoning combine to produce rigorous mathematical arguments. Covers the logical skeleton of direct proof, contraposition, contradiction, cases, and induction; the role of definitions, lemmas, and theorems; how informal mathematical prose maps to formal deductive structure; and the difference between proof-as-object and proof-as-activity. Use when the question is "why is this a valid proof?" rather than "what proof technique applies?"Writing★ 71
Ratings & reviews
—
no reviews
Tried this skill? Rate it to help others. Sign in
Discussion
Join the discussion. Sign in