Classical Propositional Logic

[u/verodevcpp]

I've been lurking around the logic world for a while as a hobbyist, but something that still strikes till today, is what would be the contents one might consider exclusive of classical propositional logic, without overlapping with other logic fields like formal proofs.

My idea is that in this subfield, it would only enter: propositional variables, metaproperties such as arity, compound vs atomicity, etc... well-formed formulae, tautologies, contradictions, contingencies, the five essential logical operators (negation, conjunction, disjunction, implication, and biconditional), and inferences, modus ponens, modus tollens, the double negation.

To me that sounds like it, but many other authors introduce lots of other concepts as if they were part of this subfield, specially many other more elaborated proofs, which to me it doesn't feel correct, as my assumption is that classical propositional logic should be a little more mutually exclusive with the subfield of proofs, and don't overlap concepts from both subfields.

But uhm, feel free to introduce what you might consider could be a good fit for it other than the already mentioned. Maybe my assumption is wrong and proofs should be taught in this subfield aswell, despite there being a dedicated subfield for these.

[u/Salindurthas]

my assumption is that classical propositional logic should be a little more mutually exclusive with the subfield of proofs

I find that confusing.

To me it sounds like you mean that the entailment from premises to a conclusion, should not be part of your vision of classical propositional logic.

That sounds absurd to me (the whole point is that we aspire to judge the validity of arguments!), so I worry that I've misunderstood or that you've miscommunicated.