Abstract
We show that as long as the propositional constants t and f are not included in the language, any language-preserving extension of any important fragment of the relevance logics R and RMI can have only classical tautologies as theorems (this includes intuitionistic logic and its extensions). This property is not preserved, though, if either t or f is added to the language, or if the contraction axiom is deleted.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, A.R., Belnap, N.D.: Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, vol. I. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1975)
Avron A.: Relevant entailment—semantics and formal systems. J. Symbolic Logic 49, 334–342 (1984)
Avron A.: On purely relevant logics. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 27, 180–194 (1986)
Avron A.: Relevance and paraconsistency—a new approach. J. Symbolic Logic 55, 707–732 (1990)
Avron A.: Relevance and paraconsistency—a new approach. Part II: The formal systems. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 31, 169–202 (1990)
Avron A.: Whither relevance logic?. J. Philos. Logic 21, 243–281 (1992)
Avro A.: What is relevance logic?. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 165, 26–48 (2014)
Dunn, J.M., Restall, G.: Relevance logic. In: Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn, vol. 6, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–128 (2002)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Avron, A. The Classical Constraint on Relevance. Log. Univers. 8, 1–15 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-013-0092-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11787-013-0092-y