What kind of logic is “Independence Friendly” logic?

Abstract
1. Two kinds of logic. To a first approximation there are two main kinds of pursuit in logic. The first is the traditional one going back two millennia, concerned with characterizing the logically valid inferences. The second is the one that emerged most systematically only in the twentieth century, concerned with the semantics of logical operations. In the view of modern, model-theoretical eyes, the first requires the second, but not vice-versa. According to Tarski’s generally accepted account of logical consequence (1936), inference from some statements as hypotheses to a statement as conclusion is logically valid if the truth of the hypotheses ensures the truth of the conclusion, in a way that depends only on the form of the statements involved, not on their content. Interpreted model-theoretically this means that every model of the hypotheses is a model of the conclusion. However, there is an ambiguity in Tarski’s explication, as he himself emphasized, since for the specification of form one needs to determine what are the logical notions. Once those are isolated and their semantical roles are settled, one can see how the truth of a statement (in a given model and relative to given assignments) is composed from the truth of its basic parts, in whatever way those are specified. The problem of what are the logical notions is an unsettled and controversial one (cf. Feferman 1999, Gómez-Torrente 2002). In the classical truthfunctional perspective, proposals range from those of first-order logic to generalized quantifiers to second and higher-order quantifiers to infinitary languages and beyond. Many of these stronger semantical notions have been treated in the volume Model Theoretic Logics (Barwise and Feferman 1987). In a series of singular, thought-provoking publications in recent years, Jaakko Hintikka has vigorously promoted consideration of an extension of first-order logic called IF logic, along with claims that its adoption promises to have revolutionary consequences..
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
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 Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,986
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Alexander Paseau (2010). Pure Second-Order Logic with Second-Order Identity. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 51 (3):351-360.
Kevin C. Klement, Propositional Logic. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
John P. Burgess (2011). Kripke Models. In Alan Berger (ed.), Saul Kripke. Cambridge University Press.
Fredrik Engström (2012). Generalized Quantifiers in Dependence Logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21 (3):299-324.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-12-22

Total downloads

10 ( #145,939 of 1,100,978 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #290,065 of 1,100,978 )

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.