Modal Logics A Summary of the Well-Behaved
| Abstract | Modal logic is an enormous subject, and so any discussion of it must limit itself according to some set of principles. Modal logic is of interest to mathematicians, philosophers, linguists and computer scientists, for somewhat different reasons. Typically a philosopher may be interested in capturing some aspect of necessary truth, while a mathematician may be interested in characterizing a class of models having special structural features. For a computer scientist there is another criterion that is not as relevant for the other disciplines: a logic should be ‘well-behaved.’ This is, admittedly, a vague notion, but some things are clear enough. A logic that can be axiomatized is better than one that can’t be; a logic with a simple axiomatization is better yet; and a logic with a reasonably implementable proof procedure is best of all. My current interests are largely centered in computer science, and so I will only discuss well-behaved modal logics. My talk is organized into three sections, depending on the expressiveness of the modal logics considered: propositional; first-order with rigid designators; first-order with non-rigid designators. Even limited as I have said, the subject is a big one, and this talk can be no more than an outline. For a general discussion of propositional modal logic see [2]; for this and first-order modal logic see [9], [10] and [8]; for tableau systems in modal logic see [6]. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesMinghui Ma (2010). Toward Model-Theoretic Modal Logics. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 5 (2):294-311.
Marcelo E. Coniglio & Newton M. Peron (2013). Modal Extensions of Sub-Classical Logics for Recovering Classical Logic. Logica Universalis 7 (1):71-86.
V. V. Rybakov (1995). Hereditarily Structurally Complete Modal Logics. Journal of Symbolic Logic 60 (1):266-288.
Norihiro Kamide (2002). Kripke Semantics for Modal Substructural Logics. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (4):453-470.
Johan van Benthem, Giovanna D'Agostino, Angelo Montanari & Alberto Policriti (1998). Modal Deduction in Second-Order Logic and Set Theory - II. Studia Logica 60 (3):387-420.
Richard Sylvan (1988). Intuitionist Logic — Subsystem of, Extension of, or Rival to, Classical Logic? Philosophical Studies 53 (1):147 - 151.
Frank Wolter (1997). Superintuitionistic Companions of Classical Modal Logics. Studia Logica 58 (2):229-259.
Takahiro Seki (2003). A Sahlqvist Theorem for Relevant Modal Logics. Studia Logica 73 (3):383 - 411.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-12-22Total downloads7 ( #134,983 of 556,896 )Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #27,428 of 556,896 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
