Revisiting Jaśkowski's Criterion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2026.009Słowa kluczowe
Jaśkowski’s criterion, paraconsistency, philosophical interpretation, formal philosophyAbstrakt
This paper aims to re-examine the so-called Jaśkowski’s criterion. This guiding principle was initially proposed as a methodological instrument for delineating formal systems as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory paraconsistent logics. It is a historical fact that Jaśkowski’s criterion has been, and remains, frequently overlooked in the relevant literature. In order to provide a detailed explanation of this fact and the argument for it being a regrettable state, there are three main points elaborated upon. Firstly, the philosophical motivations of Jaśkowski’s work. Secondly, an overview of some early attempts of meeting requirements of Jaśkowski’s criterion. Thirdly, its relevance to contemporary research in the field of philosophical logic, particularly in relation to recent discussions on the notion of ‘philosophical interpretation’. From the above, philosophical conclusions are drawn, and avenues for further research are identified.
Bibliografia
Antunes, H., and D. E. Szmuc, 2022, “An introduction to the special issue: Logics and their interpretations I”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 31: 177–181.
Barrio, E. A., E. Bezerra and B. Da Ré, 2025, “Philosophical interpretations matter”, Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 29(2): 203–225. DOI: CrossRef
Basu, S. S., and S. Roy, 2022, “Negation-free definitions of paraconsistency”, Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science 358: 150–159. DOI: CrossRef
Béziau, J.-Y., 2006, “The paraconsistent logic Z. A possible solution to Jaśkowski’s problem”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 15(2): 99–111. DOI: CrossRef
Burgess, J. P., 2016, “Logic and philosophical methodology”, pages 607–621 in H. Cappelen, T. S. Gendler and J. Hawthorn (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Methodology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: CrossRef
Cappelen, H., T. S. Gendler and J. Hawthorne (eds.), 2016, The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Methodology, Oxford University Press. DOI: CrossRef
Carnielli, W., and A. Rodrigues, 2021, “On epistemic and ontological interpretations of intuitionistic and paraconsistent paradigms”, Logic Journal of the IGPL 29(4): 569–584.
Ciuciura, J., 2003, “Logika dyskusyjna”, Principia 35(36): 279–291.
da Costa, N. C. A., 1974, “On the theory of inconsistent formal systems”, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15(4): 497–510. DOI: CrossRef
da Costa, N. C. A., and J. R. B. Arenhart, 2018, “Full-blooded antiexceptionalism about logic”, The Australasian Journal of Logic 15(2): 362–380. DOI: CrossRef
da Costa, N. C. A., and I. M. L. D’Ottaviano, 1970, ”Sur un probleme de Jaśkowski”, Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences Paris 270A: 1349–1353.
da Costa, N. C. A., and J. Kotas, 1978, “On the problem of Jaśkowski and the Logic of Łukasiewicz”, pages 127–139 in A. I. Arruda, N. C. A. da Costa and R. Chuaqui (eds.), Mathematical Logic: Proceedings of the First Brazilian Conference.
Dubikajtis, L., 1975, “The life and works of Stanisław Jaśkowski” Studia Logica 34(2): 109–116.
Fazio, D., T. Jarmużek, J. Malinowski and K. Mruczek-Nasieniewska, “Jaśkowski’s discovery and various ways to master contradictions”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 44(4): 475–499. DOI: 10.12775/LLP.2025.023">CrossRef
Goldberg, S. (ed.), 2020, The Oxford Handbook of Assertion, Oxford University Press. DOI: CrossRef
Horvath, J., S. Koch and M. G. Titelbaum, 2025, Methods in Analytic Philosophy. A Primer and Guide, The PhilPapers Foundation.
Indrzejczak, A., 2018, “Stanisław Jaśkowski: Life and work”, pages 457–464 in A. Garrido and U. Wybraniec-Skardowska (eds.), The Lvov-Warsaw School.
Past and Present, Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI: CrossRef
Jacquette, D., 1994, “Formalization in philosophical logic”, Monist 77(3): 358–375. DOI: CrossRef
Jaśkowski, S., 1947, “Zagadnienia logiczne a matematyka”, Myśl Współczesna, 7–8(14–15): 57–50.
Jaśkowski, S., 1948, “Rachunek zdań dla systemów dedukcyjnych sprzecznych”, Studia Societatis Scientiarum Torunesis 1(5): 55–77.
Jaśkowski, S., 1999, “A propositional calculus for inconsistent deductive systems”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 7(1): 33–65. DOI: CrossRef
Kotas, J., and N. C. A. da Costa, 1977, “On some modal logical systems defined in connexion with Jaśkowski’s problem”, pages 57–73 in A. I. Arruda, N. C. A. da Costa and R. Chuaqui (eds.), Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, Elsevier.
Kotas, J., and A. Pieczkowski, 1967, ”Scientific works of Stanisław Jaśkowski” Studia Logica 21: 7–15. CrossRef
Krawczyk, J., 2023, “Miejsce Jana Łukasiewicza i Stanisława Jaśkowskiego w polskiej dyskusji o zasadzie niesprzeczności”, Edukacja Filozoficzna, 75(1): 135–161. DOI: CrossRef
Kripke, S., 1975, “Outline of a theory of truth”, The Journal of Philosophy 72(19): 690–716. DOI: CrossRef
Marcos, J., 2005, “On a problem of da Costa”, pages 53–69 in G. Sica (ed.), Essays on the Foundations of Mathematics and Logic, Monza: Polimetrica.
Mruczek-Nasieniewska, K., and M. Nasieniewski, 2018, “A characterisation of some Z-like logics”, Logica Universalis 12(3–4): 207–219. DOI: CrossRef
Nicolás-Francisco, R., 2023, “On the Polish “via modalization” approach to paraconsistency”, Edukacja Filozoficzna 74: 161–182. DOI: CrossRef
Omori, H., and T. Waragai, 2008, “On Béziau’s logic Z”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 17(4): 305–320. DOI: CrossRef
Osorio, M., J. L. Carballido and C. Zepeda, 2014, “Revisiting Z”, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 55(1): 129–155. DOI: CrossRef
Peregrin, J., and V. Svoboda, 2022, “Logica Dominans vs. Logica Serviens”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 31: 183–207. DOI: CrossRef
Restall, G., 2019, “Two negations are more than one”, pages 455–468 in C. Başkent and T. M. Ferguson (eds.), Graham Priest on Dialetheism and Paraconsistency: Springer. DOI: CrossRef
Rodrgiues, A., M. Nasieniewski and R. A. Nicolás-Francisco, 2025, “Some remarks on two seminal approaches to paraconsistency: Stanisław Jaśkowski and Newton da Costa”, Studia Logica 113(4): 1139–1194. DOI: CrossRef
Sher, G., 2020, “Pluralism and normativity in truth and logic”, American Philosophical Quarterly, 57(4): 337–354. DOI: CrossRef
Stalnaker, R., 1978, “Assertion”, Syntax and Semantics (New York Academic Press) 9: 315–332. DOI: CrossRef
Stalnaker, R., 2002, “Common ground”, Linguistics and Philosophy 25(5–6): 701–721. DOI: CrossRef
Tajer, D., 2020, “LFIs and methods of classical recapture”, Logic Journal of the IGPL, 28(5): 807–816. DOI: CrossRef
Tajer, D., and C. Fiore, 2022, “Logical pluralism and interpretations of logical systems”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 31: 209–234. DOI: CrossRef
Tanaka, K., 2003, “Three schools of paraconsistency”, The Australasian Journal of Logic 1: 28–42. DOI: CrossRef
Urchs, M., 2025, “The beginnings of Toruń logic”, Logic and Logical Philosophy 34(4): 603–630. DOI: CrossRef
Woźniak, M., 2021, “Dialectical logic or logical dialectics? The Polish discussion on the principle of non-contradiction (1946–1957)”, Studies in East European Thought 74(1): 111–127. DOI: CrossRef
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Licencja
Prawa autorskie (c) 2026 Jakub Krawczyk

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 59
Liczba cytowań: 0