Abstract
However broad or vague the notion of connexivity may be, it seems to be similar to the notion of relevance even when relevance and connexive logics have been shown to be incompatible to one another. Relevance logics can be examined by suggesting syntactic relevance principles and inspecting if the theorems of a logic abide to them. In this paper we want to suggest that a similar strategy can be employed with connexive logics. To do so, we will suggest some properties that seem to be hinted at in Nelson’s work. Following this strategy will ideally shed some light over the notion of content and will also help make a clear comparison between relevance and connexive logics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackermann, W. (1956). Begründung einer strengen Implikation. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 21(2), 113–128.
Anderson, A. R. and Belnap, N. D. (1975). Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity. Vol. I. Princeton University Press.
Angell, R. B. (1967/2016). Connexive implication, modal logic and subjunctive conditionals. IFCoLog Journal of Logic and its Applications, 3(3), 317–334.
Avron, A. (1992). Whither relevance logic? Journal of Philosophical Logic, 21(3), 243–281.
Estrada-González, L. (2020). The intuitive logical content of CC1. Unpublished typescript.
Estrada-González, L., & Ramírez-Cámara, E. (2020). A Nelsonian response to ‘the most embarrassing of all twelfth-century arguments’. History and Philosophy of Logic, 41(2), 101–113.
Francez, N. (2019). Relevant connexive logic. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 28, 409–425.
Hilbert, D. and Ackermann, W. (1928). Grundzügen der theoretischen Logik. Springer-Verlag.
Mares, E. (2004). Relevant Logic. A Philosophical Interpretation: Cambridge University Press.
McCall, S. (1966). Connexive implication. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 31(3), 415–433.
McCall, S. (1975). Connexive implication. In A.R. Anderson and N.D. Belnap, Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity. Volume 1, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 434–446.
McCall, S. (2012). A history of connexivity. In D.M. Gabbay et al. (eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic. Volume 11. Logic: A History of its Central Concepts. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 415–449.
Méndez, J. M. (1986). Una crítica inmanente de la lógica de la relevancia. Crítica: Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía, 18(52), 61–94.
Méndez, J. M. (1988). The compatibility of relevance and mingle. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 17, 279–297.
Meyer, R. K., & McRobbie, M. A. (1982). Multisets and relevant implication I. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 60(2), 107–139.
Mortensen, C. (1984). Aristotle’s thesis in consistent and inconsistent logics. Studia Logica, 43(1–2), 107–116.
Nelson, E. J. (1930). Intensional relations. Mind, 39(156), 440–453.
Nelson, E. J. (1933). Deductive systems and the absoluteness of logic. Mind, 42(165), 30–42.
Omori, H. (2016). A simple connexive extension of the basic relevant logic BD. IFCoLog Journal of Logic and their Applications, 3(3), 467–478.
Pizzi, C. (2009). The problem of existential import in first-order consequential logics. In Carnielli, W. A. et al. (eds.) (2009). The Many Sides of Logic. London: College Publications, pp. 133–150.
Routley, R. (1978). Semantics for connexive logics. I. Studia Logica, 37(4), 393–412.
Routley, R., & Montgomery, H. (1968). On systems containing Aristotle’s thesis. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 33(1), 82–96.
Routley, R., Meyer, R. K., Plumwood, V., & Brady, R. (1982). Relevant Logics and their Rivals 1. Atascadero: Ridgeview.
Sylvan, R. (1989). An orientational survey of sociative logics. In Bystanders Guide to Sociative Logics. Australian National University, Canberra. Reprinted with minor modifications in Hyde, D. and Priest, G. (eds.), (2000). Sociative Logics and their Applications. Essays by the Late Richard Sylvan. Ashgate, pp. 29–51.
Thompson, B. E. R. (1991). Why is conjunctive simplification invalid? Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 32(2), 248–254.
Wansing, H. (2005). Connexive modal logic. In R. Schmidt et al. (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic. Volume 5. London: King’s College Publications, pp. 367–383.
Wansing, H. (2020). Connexive logic. In Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Spring edition.
Wansing, H., & Skurt, D. (2018). Negation as cancellation, connexive logic, and qLPm. Australasian Journal of Logic, 15(2), 476–488.
Acknowledgments
This work was done under the support of the PAPIIT project IN403719 “Intensionality all the way down: a new plan for logical relevance”. Elisángela Ramírez-Cámara, Ricardo Arturo Nicolás-Francisco and Raymundo Morado made extremely useful comments to very early versions of this text. Another ancestor was presented at the CLMPST 2019’s symposium “New Directions in Connexive Logic”. We thank Michèle Friend, Hitoshi Omori, Andrew Tedder and Heinrich Wansing for their comments, questions and suggestions. Finally, two anonymous referees for this journal deserve special thanks for their comments, which helped us in improving the typescript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Estrada-González, L., Tanús-Pimentel, C.L. Variable Sharing in Connexive Logic. J Philos Logic 50, 1377–1388 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-021-09602-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-021-09602-y