On the Ternary Relation and Conditionality

Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (3):595-612 (2012)
Abstract One of the most dominant approaches to semantics for relevant (and many paraconsistent) logics is the Routley–Meyer semantics involving a ternary relation on points. To some (many?), this ternary relation has seemed like a technical trick devoid of an intuitively appealing philosophical story that connects it up with conditionality in general. In this paper, we respond to this worry by providing three different philosophical accounts of the ternary relation that correspond to three conceptions of conditionality. We close by briefly discussing a general conception of conditionality that may unify the three given conceptions
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,701
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Ewa Orlowska (1992). Relational Proof System for Relevant Logics. Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (4):1425-1440.
    Edwin D. Mares (1995). A Star-Free Semantics for R. Journal of Symbolic Logic 60 (2):579 - 590.
    Ren (2008). The Knowledge Relation: Binary or Ternary? Social Epistemology 22 (3):281 – 288.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2010-11-13

    Total downloads

    51 ( #20,554 of 549,124 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    4 ( #19,263 of 549,124 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums