Predicativity and parametric polymorphism of Brouwerian implication

A common objection to the definition of intuitionistic implication in the Proof Interpretation is that it is impredicative. I discuss the history of that objection, argue that in Brouwer's writings predicativity of implication is ensured through parametric polymorphism of functions on species, and compare this construal with the alternative approaches to predicative implication of Goodman, Dummett, Prawitz, and Martin-L\"of.Comment: Added further references (Pistone, Poincar\'e, Tabatabai, Van Atten

Rules and derivations in an elementary logic course

When teaching an elementary logic course to students who have a general scientific background but have never been exposed to logic, we have to face the problem that the notions of deduction rule and of derivation are completely new to them, and are related to nothing they already know, unlike, for instance, the notion of model, that can be seen as a generalization of the notion of algebraic structure. In this note, we defend the idea that one strategy to introduce these notions is to start with the notion of inductive definition [1]. Then, the notion of derivation comes naturally. We also defend the idea that derivations are pervasive in logic and that defining precisely this notion at an early stage is a good investment to later define other notions in proof theory, computability theory, automata theory, ... Finally, we defend the idea that to define the notion of derivation precisely, we need to distinguish two notions of derivation: labeled with elements and labeled with rule names. This approach has been taken in [2]

Filozofia i logika intuicjonizmu

At the end of the 19th century in the fundamentals of mathematics appeared a crisis. It was caused by the paradoxes found in Cantor’s set theory. One of the ideas a resolving the crisis was intuitionism – one of the constructivist trends in the philosophy of mathematics. Its creator was Brouwer, the main representative was Heyting. In this paper described will be attempt to construct a suitable logic for philosophical intuitionism theses. In second paragraph Heyting system will be present – its axioms and matrices truth-. Later Gödel theorem about the inadequacy of finite dimensional matrices for this system will be explained. At the end this paper an infinite sequence of matrices adequate for Heyting axioms proposed by Jaśkowski will be described.At the end of the 19th century in the fundamentals of mathematics appeared a crisis. It was caused by the paradoxes found in Cantor’s set theory. One of the ideas a resolving the crisis was intuitionism – one of the constructivist trends in the philosophy of mathematics. Its creator was Brouwer, the main representative was Heyting. In this paper described will be attempt to construct a suitable logic for philosophical intuitionism theses. In second paragraph Heyting system will be present – its axioms and matrices truth-. Later Gödel theorem about the inadequacy of finite dimensional matrices for this system will be explained. At the end this paper an infinite sequence of matrices adequate for Heyting axioms proposed by Jaśkowski will be described

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