Theoria 1 (1):253-258 (1985)
|Abstract||A system S has the “converse Ackermann property” (C.A.P.) if (A -> B) -> C is unprovable in S whenever C is a propositional variable. In this paper we define the fragments with the C.A.P. of some well-know propositional systems in the spectrum between the minimal and classical logic. In the first part we succesively study the implicative and positive fragments and the full calculi. In the second, we prove by a matrix method that each one of the systems has the C.A.P. Thus, we think the problem proposed in Anderson & Belnap (1975) § 8.12 has been solved|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
José M. Méndez (1987). A Routley-Meyer Semantics for Converse Ackermann Property. Journal of Philosophical Logic 16 (1):65 - 76.
Anna Zamansky & Arnon Avron (2006). Cut-Elimination and Quantification in Canonical Systems. Studia Logica 82 (1):157 - 176.
David Fernández-Duque (2011). Dynamic Topological Logic Interpreted Over Minimal Systems. Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (6):767-804.
Ronald P. Endicott (1994). Constructival Plasticity. Philosophical Studies 74 (1):51-75.
Mark Kaminski & Gert Smolka (2009). Terminating Tableau Systems for Hybrid Logic with Difference and Converse. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 18 (4).
Gemma Robles & José M. Méndez (2011). A Routley-Meyer Semantics for Relevant Logics Including TWR Plus the Disjunctive Syllogism. Logic Journal of the IGPL 19 (1):18-32.
John Slaney (1993). Sentential Constants in Systems Near R. Studia Logica 52 (3):443 - 455.
Jose A. Mendez (1987). A Routley-Meyer Semantics For Converse Ackermann Property. Journal of Philosophical Logic 16 (February):65-76.
José M. Méndez (1988). Converse Ackermann Croperty and Semiclassical Negation. Studia Logica 47 (2):159 - 168.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?