Relevance logics, paradoxes of consistency and the K rule II. A non-constructive negation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2006.011Słowa kluczowe
implicative paradoxes, substructural logics, relevance logics, ternary relational semanticsAbstrakt
The logic B+ is Routley and Meyer’s basic positive logic. We define the logics BK+ and BK'+ by adding to B+ the K rule and to BK+ the characteristic S4 axiom, respectively. These logics are endowed with a relatively strong non-constructive negation. We prove that all the logics defined lack the K axiom and the standard paradoxes of consistency.Bibliografia
A.R. Anderson, N.D. Jr. Belnap, Entailment. The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, vol. I, Princeton University Press, 1975.
A.R. Anderson, N.D. Jr. Belnap, J.M. Dunn, Entailment. The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, vol. II, Princeton University Press, 1992.
I. Hacking, “What is strict implication?”, Journal of Symbolic Logic 28 (1963), 51–71.
C.I. Lewis, H. Langford, Symbolic Logic, 1932 (2nd edition, Dover, New York, 1959).
E.D. Mares, “CE is not a conservative extension of E”, Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (2000), 263–275.
J.M. Méndez, F. Salto, G. Robles, “Anderson and Belnap’s minimal positive logic with minimal negation”, Reports on Mathematical Logic 36 (2002), 117–130.
R.K. Meyer and R. Routley, “Classical Relevant Logics I”, Studia Logica 32 (1973), 51–66.
R.K. Meyer and R. Routley, “Classical Relevant Logics II”, Studia Logica 33 (1974), 183–194.
G. Robles, J.M. Méndez, F. Salto, “Relevance logics, paradoxes of consistency and the K rule” (contributed paper presented at the Logic Colloquium 2006, Nijmegen, The Netherlands July, 27 – August 2) Bulletin of Symbolic Logic (abstract accepted).
R. Routley et al., Relevant Logics and their Rivals, vol. 1, Ridgeview Press, Ridgeview, 1982.
Pobrania
Opublikowane
Jak cytować
Numer
Dział
Statystyki
Liczba wyświetleń i pobrań: 668
Liczba cytowań: 0
