A History of Until

Until is a notoriously difficult temporal operator as it is both existential and universal at the same time: A until B holds at the current time instant w iff either B holds at w or there exists a time instant w' in the future at which B holds and such that A holds in all the time instants between the current one and w'. This "ambivalent" nature poses a significant challenge when attempting to give deduction rules for until. In this paper, in contrast, we make explicit this duality of until to provide well-behaved natural deduction rules for linear-time logics by introducing a new temporal operator that allows us to formalize the "history" of until, i.e., the "internal" universal quantification over the time instants between the current one and w'. This approach provides the basis for formalizing deduction systems for temporal logics endowed with the until operator. For concreteness, we give here a labeled natural deduction system for a linear-time logic endowed with the new operator and show that, via a proper translation, such a system is also sound and complete with respect to the linear temporal logic LTL with until.Comment: 24 pages, full version of paper at Methods for Modalities 2009 (M4M-6

NaDeA: A Natural Deduction Assistant with a Formalization in Isabelle

We present a new software tool for teaching logic based on natural deduction. Its proof system is formalized in the proof assistant Isabelle such that its definition is very precise. Soundness of the formalization has been proved in Isabelle. The tool is open source software developed in TypeScript / JavaScript and can thus be used directly in a browser without any further installation. Although developed for undergraduate computer science students who are used to study and program concrete computer code in a programming language we consider the approach relevant for a broader audience and for other proof systems as well.Comment: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Tools for Teaching Logic (TTL2015), Rennes, France, June 9-12, 2015. Editors: M. Antonia Huertas, Jo\~ao Marcos, Mar\'ia Manzano, Sophie Pinchinat, Fran\c{c}ois Schwarzentrube

User interface for natural deduction

Tema ovog diplomskog rada je izrada programskog sučelja za prirodnu dedukciju. A svrha samog diplomskog rada je omogućiti korisniku korištenje progamskog sučelja kako bi mogao kreirati dokaze za prirodnu dedukciju kroz aplikaciju. U prvom poglavlju objašnjen je koncept prirodne dedukcije i simbolizmi korišteni u istoj, kao i jezik prirodne dedukcije. Objašnjeno je dokazivanje i način zapisivanja istog. Nakon toga opisana su pravila prirodne dedukcije koja je potrebno postaviti za pravila programa. Drugo poglavlje se bavi samim sustavom u kojem je sučelje izrađeno, odnosno Android sustavom i Java programskim jezikom. Objašnjena je povijest sustava i zašto je sam sustav izabran za ovaj rad. Treće poglavlje odnosi se na izradu i na rad same aplikacije.The theme of this paper is creation of an interface for natural deduction. And the purpose of the paper itself is to enable the users of the interface to create natural deduction proofs through the use of the application. The first chapter explains the concept of natural deduction, as well as the symbols used. The same chapter explains argumentation and the way it is written. After the argumentation chapter explains the rules of the natural deduction that are necessary for the application. Second chapter is about the the system in which the interface is made, Android system and the Java programming language. It briefly explains the history of the system and why it was choosen for this assignment. Third chapter refers to the creation of the application and on how the application works

Greek and Roman Logic

In ancient philosophy, there is no discipline called “logic” in the contemporary sense of “the study of formally valid arguments.” Rather, once a subfield of philosophy comes to be called “logic,” namely in Hellenistic philosophy, the field includes (among other things) epistemology, normative epistemology, philosophy of language, the theory of truth, and what we call logic today. This entry aims to examine ancient theorizing that makes contact with the contemporary conception. Thus, we will here emphasize the theories of the “syllogism” in the Aristotelian and Stoic traditions. However, because the context in which these theories were developed and discussed were deeply epistemological in nature, we will also include references to the areas of epistemological theorizing that bear directly on theories of the syllogism, particularly concerning “demonstration.” Similarly, we will include literature that discusses the principles governing logic and the components that make up arguments, which are topics that might now fall under the headings of philosophy of logic or non-classical logic. This includes discussions of problems and paradoxes that connect to contemporary logic and which historically spurred developments of logical method. For example, there is great interest among ancient philosophers in the question of whether all statements have truth-values. Relevant themes here include future contingents, paradoxes of vagueness, and semantic paradoxes like the liar. We also include discussion of the paradoxes of the infinite for similar reasons, since solutions have introduced sophisticated tools of logical analysis and there are a range of related, modern philosophical concerns about the application of some logical principles in infinite domains. Our criterion excludes, however, many of the themes that Hellenistic philosophers consider part of logic, in particular, it excludes epistemology and metaphysical questions about truth. Ancient philosophers do not write treatises “On Logic,” where the topic would be what today counts as logic. Instead, arguments and theories that count as “logic” by our criterion are found in a wide range of texts. For the most part, our entry follows chronology, tracing ancient logic from its beginnings to Late Antiquity. However, some themes are discussed in several eras of ancient logic; ancient logicians engage closely with each other’s views. Accordingly, relevant publications address several authors and periods in conjunction. These contributions are listed in three thematic sections at the end of our entry