2,728 research outputs found
Ecumenical modal logic
The discussion about how to put together Gentzen's systems for classical and
intuitionistic logic in a single unified system is back in fashion. Indeed,
recently Prawitz and others have been discussing the so called Ecumenical
Systems, where connectives from these logics can co-exist in peace. In Prawitz'
system, the classical logician and the intuitionistic logician would share the
universal quantifier, conjunction, negation, and the constant for the absurd,
but they would each have their own existential quantifier, disjunction, and
implication, with different meanings. Prawitz' main idea is that these
different meanings are given by a semantical framework that can be accepted by
both parties. In a recent work, Ecumenical sequent calculi and a nested system
were presented, and some very interesting proof theoretical properties of the
systems were established. In this work we extend Prawitz' Ecumenical idea to
alethic K-modalities
Some Logical Notations for Pragmatic Assertions
The pragmatic notion of assertion has an important inferential role in logic. There are also many notational forms to express assertions in logical systems. This paper reviews, compares and analyses languages with signs for assertions, including explicit signs such as Frege’s and Dalla Pozza’s logical systems and implicit signs with no specific sign for assertion, such as Peirce’s algebraic and graphical logics and the recent modification of the latter termed Assertive Graphs. We identify and discuss the main ‘points’ of these notations on the logical representation of assertions, and evaluate their systems from the perspective of the philosophy of logical notations. Pragmatic assertions turn out to be useful in providing intended interpretations of a variety of logical systems
G\"odel's Notre Dame Course
This is a companion to a paper by the authors entitled "G\"odel's natural
deduction", which presented and made comments about the natural deduction
system in G\"odel's unpublished notes for the elementary logic course he gave
at the University of Notre Dame in 1939. In that earlier paper, which was
itself a companion to a paper that examined the links between some
philosophical views ascribed to G\"odel and general proof theory, one can find
a brief summary of G\"odel's notes for the Notre Dame course. In order to put
the earlier paper in proper perspective, a more complete summary of these
interesting notes, with comments concerning them, is given here.Comment: 18 pages. minor additions, arXiv admin note: text overlap with
arXiv:1604.0307
Carnap's problem for intuitionistic propositional logic
We show that intuitionistic propositional logic is \emph{Carnap categorical}:
the only interpretation of the connectives consistent with the intuitionistic
consequence relation is the standard interpretation. This holds relative to the
most well-known semantics with respect to which intuitionistic logic is sound
and complete; among them Kripke semantics, Beth semantics, Dragalin semantics,
and topological semantics. It also holds for algebraic semantics, although
categoricity in that case is different in kind from categoricity relative to
possible worlds style semantics.Comment: Keywords: intuitionistic logic, Carnap's problem, nuclear semantics,
algebraic semantics, logical constants, consequence relations, categoricity.
Versions: 3rd version has minor additions, and correction of an error in 2nd
version (not in 1st version
Hyperlogic: A System for Talking about Logics
Sentences about logic are often used to show that certain embedding expressions, including attitude verbs, conditionals, and epistemic modals, are hyperintensional. Yet it not clear how to regiment “logic talk” in the object language so that it can be compositionally embedded under such expressions. This paper does two things. First, it argues against a standard account of logic talk, viz., the impossible worlds semantics. It is shown that this semantics does not easily extend to a language with propositional quantifiers, which are necessary for regimenting some logic talk. Second, it develops an alternative framework based on logical expressivism, which explains logic talk using shifting conventions. When combined with the standard S5π+ semantics for propositional quantifiers, this framework results in a well-behaved system that does not face the problems of the impossible worlds semantics. It can also be naturally extended with hybrid operators to regiment a broader range of logic talk, e.g., claims about what laws hold according to other logics. The resulting system, called hyperlogic, is therefore a better framework for modeling logic talk than previous accounts
A Galois connection between classical and intuitionistic logics. I: Syntax
In a 1985 commentary to his collected works, Kolmogorov remarked that his
1932 paper "was written in hope that with time, the logic of solution of
problems [i.e., intuitionistic logic] will become a permanent part of a
[standard] course of logic. A unified logical apparatus was intended to be
created, which would deal with objects of two types - propositions and
problems." We construct such a formal system QHC, which is a conservative
extension of both the intuitionistic predicate calculus QH and the classical
predicate calculus QC.
The only new connectives ? and ! of QHC induce a Galois connection (i.e., a
pair of adjoint functors) between the Lindenbaum posets (i.e. the underlying
posets of the Lindenbaum algebras) of QH and QC. Kolmogorov's double negation
translation of propositions into problems extends to a retraction of QHC onto
QH; whereas Goedel's provability translation of problems into modal
propositions extends to a retraction of QHC onto its QC+(?!) fragment,
identified with the modal logic QS4. The QH+(!?) fragment is an intuitionistic
modal logic, whose modality !? is a strict lax modality in the sense of Aczel -
and thus resembles the squash/bracket operation in intuitionistic type
theories.
The axioms of QHC attempt to give a fuller formalization (with respect to the
axioms of intuitionistic logic) to the two best known contentual
interpretations of intiuitionistic logic: Kolmogorov's problem interpretation
(incorporating standard refinements by Heyting and Kreisel) and the proof
interpretation by Orlov and Heyting (as clarified by G\"odel). While these two
interpretations are often conflated, from the viewpoint of the axioms of QHC
neither of them reduces to the other one, although they do overlap.Comment: 47 pages. The paper is rewritten in terms of a formal meta-logic (a
simplified version of Isabelle's meta-logic
- …