On purported Gentzen formulations of two positive relevent logics

Studia Logica 44 (3):233 - 236 (1985)
[10] offers two (cut-free) subscripted Gentzen systems, G 2 T + and G 2 R +, which are claimed to be equivalent in an appropriate sense to the positive relevant logics T + and R +, respectively. In this paper we show that that claim is false. We also show that the argument in [10] for the further claim that cut and/or modus ponens is admissible in two other subscripted Gentzen systems, G 1 T + and G 1 R +, is unsound.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00394443
 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: 16,658
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
Nuel D. Belnap (1982). Display Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (4):375-417.
Alasdair Urquhart (1972). Semantics for Relevant Logics. Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (1):159-169.
Nuel D. Belnap (1982). Gupta's Rule of Revision Theory of Truth. Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (1):103-116.

View all 8 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

12 ( #205,927 of 1,726,181 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

5 ( #147,227 of 1,726,181 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

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