Search results for 'imperative logic' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Jörg Hansen (forthcoming). Be Nice! How Simple Imperatives Simplify Imperative Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-13.score: 93.0
    In a series of articles, P. Vranas recently proposed a new imperative logic. The strong and weak inferences of this logic are motivated by an appeal to a strong and weak ‘support by reasons’ that transfers from the premisses of an argument to its conclusion. They also combine nonmonotonic and monotonic reasoning patterns. I show that for any moral agent, Vranas’s proposal can be simplified enormously.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Berislav Žarnić (2011). Dynamic Models in Imperative Logic (Imperatives in Action: Changing Minds and Norms). In Anna Brozek, Jacek Jadacki & Berislav Žarnić (eds.), Theory of Imperatives from Different Points of Wiev. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.score: 82.0
    The theory of imperatives is philosophically relevant since in building it — some of the long standing problems need to be addressed, and presumably some new ones are waiting to be discovered. The relevance of the theory of imperatives for philosophical research is remarkable, but usually recognized only within the field of practical philosophy. Nevertheless, the emphasis can be put on problems of theoretical philosophy. Proper understanding of imperatives is likely to raise doubts about some of our deeply entrenched and (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Peter B. M. Vranas (2008). New Foundations for Imperative Logic I: Logical Connectives, Consistency, and Quantifiers. Noûs 42 (4):529-572.score: 60.0
    Imperatives cannot be true or false, so they are shunned by logicians. And yet imperatives can be combined by logical connectives: "kiss me and hug me" is the conjunction of "kiss me" with "hug me". This example may suggest that declarative and imperative logic are isomorphic: just as the conjunction of two declaratives is true exactly if both conjuncts are true, the conjunction of two imperatives is satisfied exactly if both conjuncts are satisfied—what more is there to say? (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Nate Charlow (2014). Logic and Semantics for Imperatives. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (4):617-664.score: 57.0
    In this paper I will develop a view about the semantics of imperatives, which I term Modal Noncognitivism, on which imperatives might be said to have truth conditions (dispositionally, anyway), but on which it does not make sense to see them as expressing propositions (hence does not make sense to ascribe to them truth or falsity). This view stands against “Cognitivist” accounts of the semantics of imperatives, on which imperatives are claimed to express propositions, which are then enlisted in explanations (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Peter Geach (1958). Imperative and Deontic Logic. Analysis 18 (3):49-56.score: 52.0
    The author contends that moral utterances and imperatives have different logical features. He discusses r m hare's "language of morals" in terms of his distinction between plain imperatives and deontic utterances. (staff).
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Berislav Žarnić (2011). Prelude to a Socio-Logic of Imperatives. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (2):6-16.score: 51.0
    This short essay attempts to challenge some of widely held philosophical assumptions on the nature of the relationship between logic, language and reality. In Section 1 the hegemony of theoretical logic is being questioned; Section 2 proposes a hypothesis on socially mediated semantics; Section 3 addresses the problem of ontology of logical sentential moods.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Berislav Žarnić (2013). Logical Root of Linguistic Commitment. In Anna Brożek Jacek Jadacki & Berislav Žarnić (eds.), Theory of Imperatives from Different Points of View (2).score: 49.0
    Two parallelism hypotheses have been adopted and the third one on their relationship has been put forward. The illocutionary logic hypothesis states that the logic of linguistic commitments runs parallel to the logic of intentionality. The normative pragmatics hypothesis states that the logic of utterances runs parallel to the logic of linguistic commitments. According to the third stance or the logic projection hypothesis, the logic of utterances is the origin of all other logics (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Peter B. M. Vranas (2011). New Foundations for Imperative Logic: Pure Imperative Inference. Mind 120 (478):369 - 446.score: 48.0
    Imperatives cannot be true, but they can be obeyed or binding: `Surrender!' is obeyed if you surrender and is binding if you have a reason to surrender. A pure declarative argument — whose premisses and conclusion are declaratives — is valid exactly if, necessarily, its conclusion is true if the conjunction of its premisses is true; similarly, I suggest, a pure imperative argument — whose premisses and conclusion are imperatives — is obedience-valid (alternatively: bindingness-valid) exactly if, necessarily, its conclusion (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Peter B. M. Vranas (2012). New Foundations for Imperative Logic Iii: A General Definition of Argument Validity. Manuscript in Preparation.score: 48.0
    Besides pure declarative arguments, whose premises and conclusions are declaratives (“you sinned shamelessly; so you sinned”), and pure imperative arguments, whose premises and conclusions are imperatives (“repent quickly; so repent”), there are mixed-premise arguments, whose premises include both imperatives and declaratives (“if you sinned, repent; you sinned; so repent”), and cross-species arguments, whose premises are declaratives and whose conclusions are imperatives (“you must repent; so repent”) or vice versa (“repent; so you can repent”). I propose a general definition of (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Krister Segerberg (1990). Validity and Satisfaction in Imperative Logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31 (2):203--221.score: 48.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Jonathan Bennett (1959). Review: Hector Neri Castaneda, A Note on Imperative Logic. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 24 (1):87-88.score: 48.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Frederic B. Fitch (1940). Review: Karl Menger, A Logic of the Doubtful. On Optative and Imperative Logic. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 5 (1):40-40.score: 48.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Anna Brożek, Jacek Jadacki & Berislav Žarnić (eds.) (2013). Theory of Imperatives From Different Points of View (2). Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.score: 45.0
    The previous volume of the series Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science at Warsaw University---entitled Imperatives from Different Points of View---was the first result of the project Theory of Imperatives and Its Applications realized by the group composed by Anna Brożek, Jacek Jadacki and Berislav Žarnić. The project was supported by the Foundation for Polish Science within the program Homing Plus. One of the most important points of this project was the International Symposium Imperatives in Theory and Practice which (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Peter B. M. Vranas (2010). In Defense of Imperative Inference. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (1):59 - 71.score: 45.0
    "Surrender; therefore, surrender or fight" is apparently an argument corresponding to an inference from an imperative to an imperative. Several philosophers, however (Williams 1963; Wedeking 1970; Harrison 1991; Hansen 2008), have denied that imperative inferences exist, arguing that (1) no such inferences occur in everyday life, (2) imperatives cannot be premises or conclusions of inferences because it makes no sense to say, for example, "since surrender" or "it follows that surrender or fight", and (3) distinct imperatives have (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Hector Neri Castaneda (1955). A Note on Imperative Logic. Philosophical Studies 6 (1):1 - 4.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. R. F. Stalley (1972). Intentions, Beliefs, and Imperative Logic. Mind 81 (321):18-28.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. P. R. Bhat (1983). Hare on Imperative Logic and Inference. Indian Philosophical Quarterly 10:449-463.score: 45.0
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Arnold Johanson (1988). Imperative Logic as Based on a Galois Connection. Theoria 54 (1):1-24.score: 45.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Ivan Selimbegovic (2011). Conservative and Revolutionary Readings of the Categorical Imperative: The Logic of Desire and the Logic of Drive in Kant's Practical Philosophy. Filozofija I Drustvo 22 (2):239-263.score: 42.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Jonathan Bennett (1959). Review: P. T. Geach, Imperative and Deontic Logic; Hector Neri Castaneda, Imperatives and Deontic Logic. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 24 (3):264-265.score: 39.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. M. Finger (1997). H. Barringer, M. Fisher, D. Gabbay, R. Owens, and M. Reynolds, Eds. The Imperative Future: Principles of Executable Temporal Logic. [REVIEW] Journal of Logic Language and Information 6:105-106.score: 39.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Peter B. M. Vranas, Imperatives, Logic Of.score: 36.0
    Suppose that a sign at the entrance of a hotel reads: “Don’t enter these premises unless you are accompanied by a registered guest”. You see someone who is about to enter, and you tell her: “Don’t enter these premises if you are an unaccompanied registered guest”. She asks why, and you reply: “It follows from what the sign says”. It seems that you made a valid inference from an imperative premise to an imperative conclusion. But it also seems (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Lennart Aqvist (1971). Revised Foundations for Imperative-Epistemic and Interrogative Logic. Theoria 37 (1):33-73.score: 36.0
  24. Moshe Kroy (1976). A Partial Formalization of Kant's Categorical Imperative. An Application of Deontic Logic to Classical Moral Philosophy. Kant-Studien 67 (1-4):192-209.score: 36.0
  25. Anna Brożek, Jacek Jadacki & Berislav Žarnić (eds.) (2011). Theory of Imperatives From Different Points of View. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.score: 34.0
    The sixth volume of the series contains the first results of research done by three members of the team of researchers realizing the international project Theory of Imperatives and Its Applications, supported by the Foundation for Polish Science: Anna Brożek and Jacek Jadacki from Warsaw University, and Berislav Žarnić from Split University (Croatia). One of the texts – being a kind of the theoretical manifesto – was kindly commented by two scholars: Magdalena Danielewiczowa, a linguist from Warsaw University, and Ryszard (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Berislav Žarnić (2012). Is Unsaying Polite? In Majda Trobok Nenad Miščević & Berislav Žarnić (eds.), Between Logic and Reality. Springer. 201--224.score: 33.0
    This paper is divided in five sections. Section 11.1 sketches the history of the distinction between speech act with negative content and negated speech act, and gives a general dynamic interpretation for negated speech act. “Downdate semantics” for AGM contraction is introduced in Section 11.2. Relying on semantically interpreted contraction, Section 11.3 develops the dynamic semantics for constative and directive speech acts, and their external negations. The expressive completeness for the formal variants of natural language utterances, none of which is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Josh Parsons (2013). Command and Consequence. Philosophical Studies 164 (1):61-92.score: 31.0
    An argument is usually said to be valid iff it is truth-preserving—iff it cannot be that all its premises are true and its conclusion false. But imperatives (it is normally thought) are not truth-apt. They are not in the business of saying how the world is, and therefore cannot either succeed or fail in doing so. To solve this problem, we need to find a new criterion of validity, and I aim to propose such a criterion.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Joseph S. Fulda (1995). Reasoning with Imperatives Using Classical Logic. Sorites 3:7-11.score: 30.0
    As the journal is effectively defunct, I am uploading a full-text copy, but only of my abstract and article, and some journal front matter. -/- Note that the pagination in the PDF version differs from the official pagination because A4 and 8.5" x 11" differ. -/- Traditionally, imperatives have been handled with deontic logics, not the logic of propositions which bear truth values. Yet, an imperative is issued by the speaker to cause (stay) actions which change the state (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Jan van Eijck & Fer-Jan de Vries (1995). Reasoning About Update Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 24 (1):19-45.score: 30.0
    Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics of information processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore, so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off.This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Jan Van Eijck & Fer-Jan De Vries (1995). Reasoning About Update Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 24 (1):19 - 45.score: 30.0
    Logical frameworks for analysing the dynamics ofinformation processing abound [4, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 20, 22]. Some of these frameworks focus on the dynamics of the interpretation process, some on the dynamics of the process of drawing inferences, and some do both of these. Formalisms galore, so it is felt that some conceptual streamlining would pay off. This paper is part of a larger scale enterprise to pursue the obvious parallel between information processing and imperative programming. We demonstrate (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Jean-Gabriel Ganascia (2007). Modelling Ethical Rules of Lying with Answer Set Programming. Ethics and Information Technology 9 (1):39-47.score: 25.0
    There has been considerable discussion in the past about the assumptions and basis of different ethical rules. For instance, it is commonplace to say that ethical rules are defaults rules, which means that they tolerate exceptions. Some authors argue that morality can only be grounded in particular cases while others defend the existence of general principles related to ethical rules. Our purpose here is not to justify either position, but to try to model general ethical rules with artificial intelligence formalisms (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Rosja Mastop (2011). Norm Performatives and Deontic Logic. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (2):83-105.score: 24.0
    Deontic logic is standardly conceived as the logic of true statements about the existence of obligations and permissions. In his last writings on the subject, G. H. von Wright criticized this view of deontic logic, stressing the rationality of norm imposition as the proper foundation of deontic logic. The present paper is an attempt to advance such an account of deontic logic using the formal apparatus of update semantics and dynamic logic. That is, we (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Alessandro Giordani (2013). A Logic of Justification and Truthmaking. Review of Symbolic Logic 6 (2):323-342.score: 21.0
    In the present paper we propose a system of propositional logic for reasoning about justification, truthmaking, and the connection between justifiers and truthmakers. The logic of justification and truthmaking is developed according to the fundamental ideas introduced by Artemov. Justifiers and truthmakers are treated in a similar way, exploiting the intuition that justifiers provide epistemic grounds for propositions to be considered true, while truthmakers provide ontological grounds for propositions to be true. This system of logic is then (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Tapio Korte, Ari Maunu & Tuomo Aho (2009). Modal Logic From Kant to Possible Worlds Semantics. In Leila Haaparanta (ed.), The Development of Modern Logic. Oxford University Press.score: 21.0
    This chapter begins with a discussion of Kant's theory of judgment-forms. It argues that it is not true in Kant's logic that assertoric or apodeictic judgments imply problematic ones, in the manner in which necessity and truth imply possibility in even the weakest systems of modern modal logic. The chapter then discusses theories of judgment-form after Kant, the theory of quantification, Frege's Begriffsschrift, C. I. Lewis and the beginnings of modern modal logic, the proof-theoretic approach to modal (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Phil Corkum (forthcoming). Is Aristotle's Syllogistic a Logic? History and Philosophy of Logic.score: 21.0
    Much of the last fifty years of scholarship on Aristotle’s syllogistic suggests a conceptual framework under which the syllogistic is a logic, a system of inferential reasoning, only if it is not a theory or formal ontology, a system concerned with general features of the world. In this paper, I will argue that this a misleading interpretative framework. The syllogistic is something sui generis: by our lights, it is neither clearly a logic, nor clearly a theory, but rather (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Wilfrid Hodges (2009). Traditional Logic, Modern Logic and Natural Language. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (6):589 - 606.score: 21.0
    In a recent paper Johan van Benthem reviews earlier work done by himself and colleagues on ‘natural logic’. His paper makes a number of challenging comments on the relationships between traditional logic, modern logic and natural logic. I respond to his challenge, by drawing what I think are the most significant lines dividing traditional logic from modern. The leading difference is in the way logic is expected to be used for checking arguments. For traditionals (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Kit Fine (2014). Truth-Maker Semantics for Intuitionistic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):549-577.score: 21.0
    I propose a new semantics for intuitionistic logic, which is a cross between the construction-oriented semantics of Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov and the condition-oriented semantics of Kripke. The new semantics shows how there might be a common semantical underpinning for intuitionistic and classical logic and how intuitionistic logic might thereby be tied to a realist conception of the relationship between language and the world.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Jason Turner (2012). Logic and Ontological Pluralism. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):419-448.score: 21.0
    Ontological pluralism is the doctrine that there are different ways or modes of being. In contemporary guise, it is the doctrine that a logically perspicuous description of reality will use multiple quantifiers which cannot be thought of as ranging over a single domain. Although thought defeated for some time, recent defenses have shown a number of arguments against the view unsound. However, another worry looms: that despite looking like an attractive alternative, ontological pluralism is really no different than its counterpart, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. George Boolos (1998). Logic, Logic, and Logic. Harvard University Press.score: 21.0
    This collection, nearly all chosen by Boolos himself shortly before his death, includes thirty papers on set theory, second-order logic, and plural quantifiers; ...
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Robert Demolombe, Andreas Herzig & Ivan Varzinczak (2003). Regression in Modal Logic. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logic 13 (2):165-185.score: 21.0
    In this work we propose an encoding of Reiter’s Situation Calculus solution to the frame problem into the framework of a simple multimodal logic of actions. In particular we present the modal counterpart of the regression technique. This gives us a theorem proving method for a relevant fragment of our modal logic.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Tim S. Roberts (2001). Some Thoughts About the Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (6):609-612.score: 21.0
    "The Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever" was first described by the late George Boolos in the Spring 1996 issue of the Harvard Review of Philosophy. Although not dissimilar in appearance from many other simpler puzzles involving gods (or tribesmen) who always tell the truth or always lie, this puzzle has several features that make the solution far from trivial. This paper examines the puzzle and describes a simpler solution than that originally proposed by Boolos.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Ulrich Meyer (2009). 'Now' and 'Then' in Tense Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (2):229-247.score: 21.0
    According to Hans Kamp and Frank Vlach, the two-dimensional tense operators “now” and “then” are ineliminable in quantified tense logic. This is often adduced as an argument against tense logic, and in favor of an extensional account that makes use of explicit quantification over times. The aim of this paper is to defend tense logic against this attack. It shows that “now” and “then” are eliminable in quantified tense logic, provided we endow it with enough quantificational (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Joel J. Kupperman (2002). A Messy Derivation of the Categorical Imperative. Philosophy 77 (4):485-502.score: 21.0
    Here are two widespread responses to Kant's categorical imperative. On one hand, one might note the absence of detailed rational derivation. On the other hand, even someone who maintains some skepticism is likely to have a sense that (nevertheless) there is something to Kant's central ideas. The recommended solution is analysis of elements of the categorical imperative. Their appeal turns out to have different sources. One aspect of the first formulation rests on the logic of normative utterances. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Gregory Wheeler & Pedro Barahona (2012). Why the Hardest Logic Puzzle Ever Cannot Be Solved in Less Than Three Questions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):493-503.score: 21.0
    Rabern and Rabern (Analysis 68:105–112 2 ) and Uzquiano (Analysis 70:39–44 4 ) have each presented increasingly harder versions of ‘the hardest logic puzzle ever’ (Boolos The Harvard Review of Philosophy 6:62–65 1 ), and each has provided a two-question solution to his predecessor’s puzzle. But Uzquiano’s puzzle is different from the original and different from Rabern and Rabern’s in at least one important respect: it cannot be solved in less than three questions. In this paper we solve Uzquiano’s (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Gillian Russell (2008). One True Logic? Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):593 - 611.score: 21.0
    This is a paper about the constituents of arguments. It argues that several different kinds of truth-bearer may be taken to compose arguments, but that none of the obvious candidates—sentences, propositions, sentence/truth-value pairs etc.—make sense of logic as it is actually practiced. The paper goes on to argue that by answering the question in different ways, we can generate different logics, thus ensuring a kind of logical pluralism that is different from that of J. Beall and Greg Restall.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. M. J. Cresswell (2010). Temporal Reference in Linear Tense Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (2):173 - 200.score: 21.0
    The paper introduces a first-order theory in the language of predicate tense logic which contains a single simple axiom. It is shewn that this theory enables times to be referred to and sentences involving ‘now’ and ‘then’ to be formalised. The paper then compares this way of increasing the expressive capacity of predicate tense logic with other mechanisms, and indicates how to generalise the results to other modal and tense systems.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Byeong-Uk Yi (2005). The Logic and Meaning of Plurals. Part I. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34 (5/6):459-506.score: 21.0
    Contemporary accounts of logic and language cannot give proper treatments of plural constructions of natural languages. They assume that plural constructions are redundant devices used to abbreviate singular constructions. This paper and its sequel, "The logic and meaning of plurals, II", aim to develop an account of logic and language that acknowledges limitations of singular constructions and recognizes plural constructions as their peers. To do so, the papers present natural accounts of the logic and meaning of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Hirohiko Kushida (2010). The Modal Logic of Gödel Sentences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (5):577 - 590.score: 21.0
    The modal logic of Gödel sentences, termed as GS, is introduced to analyze the logical properties of 'true but unprovable' sentences in formal arithmetic. The logic GS is, in a sense, dual to Grzegorczyk's Logic, where modality can be interpreted as 'true and provable'. As we show, GS and Grzegorczyk's Logic are, in fact, mutually embeddable. We prove Kripke completeness and arithmetical completeness for GS. GS is also an extended system of the logic of 'Essence (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Sebastian Enqvist (2009). Interrogative Belief Revision in Modal Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (5):527 - 548.score: 21.0
    The well known AGM framework for belief revision has recently been extended to include a model of the research agenda of the agent, i.e. a set of questions to which the agent wishes to find answers (Olsson & Westlund in Erkenntnis , 65 , 165–183, 2006 ). The resulting model has later come to be called interrogative belief revision . While belief revision has been studied extensively from the point of view of modal logic, so far interrogative belief revision (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Jaakko Hintikka (2012). If Logic, Definitions and the Vicious Circle Principle. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):505-517.score: 21.0
    In a definition (∀ x )(( x є r )↔D[ x ]) of the set r, the definiens D[ x ] must not depend on the definiendum r . This implies that all quantifiers in D[ x ] are independent of r and of (∀ x ). This cannot be implemented in the traditional first-order logic, but can be expressed in IF logic. Violations of such independence requirements are what created the typical paradoxes of set theory. Poincaré’s Vicious (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000