Online research in philosophy

We present a Kripke model for Girard's Linear Logic (without exponentials) in a conservative fashion where the logical functors beyond the basic lattice operations may be added one by one without recourse to such things as negation. You can either have some logical functors or not as you choose. Commutatively and associatively are isolated in such a way that the base Kripke model is a model for noncommutative, nonassociative Linear Logic. We also extend the logic by adding a coimplication operator, similar to Curry's subtraction operator, which is resituated with Linear Logic's contensor product. And we can add contraction to get nondistributive Relevance Logic. The model rests heavily on Urquhart's representation of nondistributive lattices and also on Dunn's Gaggle Theory. Indeed, the paper may be viewed as an investigation into nondistributive Gaggle Theory restricted to binary operations. The valuations on the Kripke model are three valued: true, false, and indifferent. The lattice representation theorem of Urquhart has the nice feature of yielding Priestley's representation theorem for distributive lattices if the original lattice happens to be distributive. Hence the representation is consistent with Stone's representation of distributive and Boolean lattices, and our semantics is consistent with the Lemmon-Scott representation of modal algebras and the Routley-Meyer semantics for Relevance Logic.

The system R## of true relevant arithmetic is got by adding the -rule Infer xAx from A0, A1, A2, .... to the system R# of relevant Peano arithmetic. The rule E (or gamma) is admissible for R##. This contrasts with the counterexample to E for R# (Friedman & Meyer, Whither Relevant Arithmetic). There is a Way Up part of the proof, which selects an arbitrary non-theorem C of R## and which builds by generalizing Henkin and Belnap arguments a prime theory T which still lacks C. (The key to the Way Up is a Witness Protection Program, using the -rule.) But T may be TOO BIG, whence there is a Way Down argument that produces a better theory TR, such that R## TR T. (The key to the Way Down is a Metavaluation, on which membership in T is combined with ordinary truth-functional conditions to determine TR.) The result is a theory that is Just Right, whence it never happens that A C and A are theorems of R## but C is a non-theorem.

We show that classical two-valued logic is included in weak extensions of normal three-valued logics and also that normal three-valued logics are best viewed not as deviant logics but instead as strong extensions of classical two-valued logic obtained by adding a modal operator and the right axioms. This article develops a general method for formulating the right axioms to construct a two-valued system with theorems that correspond to all of the logical truths of any normal three-valued logic. The extended classical system can then express anything that can be expressed in the three-valued logic, so there can be no reason to abandon two-valued logic in favor of three-valued logic. Moreover, the two-valued modal system is preferable, because it enables us to study interactions of different operators with different rationales. It also makes it easier to introduce quantifiers and iteration. Nothing is lost and much is gained by choosing the extended two-valued approach over normal three-valued logics.

This essay is structured around the bifurcation between proofs and models: The first section discusses Proof Theory of relevant and substructural logics, and the second covers the Model Theory of these logics. This order is a natural one for a history of relevant and substructural logics, because much of the initial work — especially in the Anderson–Belnap tradition of relevant logics — started by developing proof theory. The model theory of relevant logic came some time later. As we will see, Dunn’s algebraic models [76, 77] Urquhart’s operational semantics [267, 268] and Routley and Meyer’s relational semantics [239, 240, 241] arrived decades after the initial burst of activity from Alan Anderson and Nuel Belnap. The same goes for work on the Lambek calculus: although inspired by a very particular application in linguistic typing, it was developed first proof-theoretically, and only later did model theory come to the fore. Girard’s linear logic is a different story: it was discovered though considerations of the categorical models of coherence..

This volume is an accessible introduction to the subject of many-valued and fuzzy logic suitable for use in relevant advanced undergraduate and graduate courses. The text opens with a discussion of the philosophical issues that give rise to fuzzy logic – problems arising from vague language – and returns to those issues as logical systems are presented. For historical and pedagogical reasons, three-valued logical systems are presented as useful intermediate systems for studying the principles and theory behind fuzzy logic.

The purpose of this paper is to present an algebraic generalization of the traditional two-valued logic. This involves introducing a theory of automorphism algebras, which is an algebraic theory of many-valued logic having a complete lattice as the set of truth values. Two generalizations of the two-valued case will be considered, viz., the finite chain and the Boolean lattice. In the case of the Boolean lattice, on choosing a designated lattice value, this algebra has binary retracts that have the usual axiomatic theory of the propositional calculus as suitable theory. This suitability applies to the Boolean algebra of formalized token models [2] where the truth values are, for example, vocabularies. Finally, as the actual motivation for this paper, we indicate how the theory of formalized token models [2] is an example of a many-valued predicate calculus.

We introduce a notion of semantical closure for theories by formalizing Nepeivoda notion of truth. [10]. Tarski theorem on truth definitions is discussed in the light of Kleene's three valued logic (here treated with a formal reinterpretation of logical constants). Connections with Definability Theory are also established.

Extended algorithmic logic (EAL) as introduced in [18] is a modified version of extended +-valued algorithmic logic. Only two-valued predicates and two-valued propositional variables occur in EAL. The role of the +-valued logic is restricted to construct control systems (stacks) of pushdown algorithms whereas their actions are described by means of the two-valued logic. Thus EAL formalizes a programming theory with recursive procedures but without the instruction CASE.The aim of this paper is to discuss EAL and prove the completeness theorem. A complete formalization of EAL was announced in [20] but no proof of the completeness theorem was given.

his paper presents a unified treatment of the propositional and first-order many-valued logics through the method of tableaux. It is shown that several important results on the proof theory and model theory of those logics can be obtained in a general way. We obtain, in this direction, abstract versions of the completeness theorem, model existence theorem (using a generalization of the classical analytic consistency properties), compactness theorem and Lowenheim-Skolem theorem. The paper is completely self-contained and includes examples of application to particular many-valued formal systems.