69 research outputs found
The Ontological Ground of the Alethic Modality
This paper is concerned with the wholly metaphysical question of whether necessity and possibility rest on nonmodal foundations—whether the truth conditions for modal statements are, in the final analysis, nonmodal. It is argued that Lewis’s modal realism is either arbitrary and stipulative or else it is circular. Even if there were Lewisean possible worlds, they could not provide the grounds for modality. D. M. Armstrong’s combinatorial approach to possibility suffers from similar defects. Since more traditional reductions to cognitive or linguistic facts suffer similar fates, the conclusion that the alethic modality is primitive and incapable of reduction is offered
Recommended from our members
Essentialism and quantified modal logic : Quine\u27s argument and Kripke\u27s semantics.
S5-Style Non-Standard Modalities in a Hypersequent Framework
The aim of the paper is to present some non-standard modalities (such as non-contingency, contingency, essence and accident) based on S5-models in a framework of cut-free hypersequent calculi. We also study negated modalities, i.e. negated necessity and negated possibility, which produce paraconsistent and paracomplete negations respectively. As a basis for our calculi, we use Restall's cut-free hypersequent calculus for S5. We modify its rules for the above-mentioned modalities and prove strong soundness and completeness theorems by a Hintikka-style argument. As a consequence, we obtain a cut admissibility theorem. Finally, we present a constructive syntactic proof of cut elimination theorem
Classical BI: Its Semantics and Proof Theory
We present Classical BI (CBI), a new addition to the family of bunched logics
which originates in O'Hearn and Pym's logic of bunched implications BI. CBI
differs from existing bunched logics in that its multiplicative connectives
behave classically rather than intuitionistically (including in particular a
multiplicative version of classical negation). At the semantic level,
CBI-formulas have the normal bunched logic reading as declarative statements
about resources, but its resource models necessarily feature more structure
than those for other bunched logics; principally, they satisfy the requirement
that every resource has a unique dual. At the proof-theoretic level, a very
natural formalism for CBI is provided by a display calculus \`a la Belnap,
which can be seen as a generalisation of the bunched sequent calculus for BI.
In this paper we formulate the aforementioned model theory and proof theory for
CBI, and prove some fundamental results about the logic, most notably
completeness of the proof theory with respect to the semantics.Comment: 42 pages, 8 figure
Bilateral Rules as Complex Rules
Proof-theoretic semantics is an inferentialist theory of meaning originally developed in a unilateral framework. Its extension to bilateral systems opens both opportunities and problems. The problems are caused especially by Coordination Principles (a kind of rule that is not present in unilateral systems) and mismatches between rules for assertion and rules for rejection. In this paper, a solution is proposed for two major issues: the availability of a reduction procedure for tonk and the existence of harmonious rules for the paradoxical zero-ary connective . The solution is based on a reinterpretation of bilateral rules as complex rules, that is, rules that introduce or eliminate connectives in a subordinate position. Looking at bilateral rules from this perspective, the problems faced by bilateralism can be seen as special cases of general problems of complex systems, which have been already analyzed in the literature. In the end, a comparison with other proposed solutions underlines the need for further investigation in order to complete the picture of bilateral proof-theoretic semantics
Philosophical logics - a survey and a bibliography
Intensional logics attract the attention of researchers from differing academic backgrounds and various scientific interests. My aim is to sketch the philosophical background of alethic, doxastic, and deontic logics, their formal and metaphysical presumptions and their various problems and paradoxes, without attempting formal rigor. A bibliography, concise on philosophical writings, is meant to allow the reader\u27s access to the maze of literature in the field
The Varieties of Ought-implies-Can and Deontic STIT Logic
STIT logic is a prominent framework for the analysis of multi-agent choice-making. In the available deontic extensions of STIT, the principle of Ought-implies-Can (OiC) fulfills a central role. However, in the philosophical literature a variety of alternative
OiC interpretations have been proposed and discussed. This paper provides a modular framework for deontic STIT that accounts for a multitude of OiC readings. In particular, we discuss, compare, and formalize ten such readings. We provide sound and complete sequent-style calculi for all of the various STIT logics accommodating these OiC principles. We formally analyze the resulting logics and discuss how the different OiC principles are logically related. In particular, we propose an endorsement principle describing which OiC readings logically commit one to other OiC readings
- …