Tonk- A Full Mathematical Solution
|Abstract||There is a long tradition (See e.g. [9, 10]) starting from , according to which the meaning of a connective is determined by the introduction and elimination rules which are associated with it. The supporters of this thesis usually have in mind natural deduction systems of a certain ideal type (explained in Section 3 below). Unfortunately, already the handling of classical negation requires rules which are not of that type. This problem can be solved in the framework of multiple-conclusion Gentzen-type systems (also ﬁrst introduced in ), where instead of introduction and elimination rules there are left introduction rules and right introduction rules|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Stephen Read (2000). Harmony and Autonomy in Classical Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (2):123-154.
L. Humberstone & D. Makinson (2012). Intuitionistic Logic and Elementary Rules. Mind 120 (480):1035-1051.
Stephen Read (2010). General-Elimination Harmony and the Meaning of the Logical Constants. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39:557-76.
Hartley Slater (2008). Harmonising Natural Deduction. Synthese 163 (2):187 - 198.
By Neil Tennant (2005). Rule-Circularity and the Justification of Deduction. Philosophical Quarterly 55 (221):625–648.
Peter Milne (1994). Classical Harmony: Rules of Inference and the Meaning of the Logical Constants. Synthese 100 (1):49 - 94.
Anna Zamansky & Arnon Avron (2006). Cut-Elimination and Quantification in Canonical Systems. Studia Logica 82 (1):157 - 176.
Heinrich Wansing (2006). Connectives Stranger Than Tonk. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (6):653 - 660.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #49,632 of 549,120 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,263 of 549,120 )
How can I increase my downloads?