Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-22T11:22:24.528Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONNEXIVE IMPLICATIONS IN SUBSTRUCTURAL LOGICS

Part of: General logic Philosophical aspects of logic and foundations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2023

DAVIDE FAZIO  and
GAVIN ST. JOHN Open the ORCID record for GAVIN ST. JOHN [Opens in a new window]
DAVIDE FAZIO*
Affiliation:
DIPARTIMENTO DI SCIENZE DELLA COMUNICAZIONE UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI TERAMO CAMPUS “AURELIO SALICETI,” VIA R. BALZARINI 1, 64100 TERAMO (TE), ITALY
GAVIN ST. JOHN
Affiliation:
DIPARTIMENTO DI MATEMATICA UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI SALERNO VIA GIOVANNI PAOLO II, 132, 84084 FISCIANO (SA), ITALY E-mail: gavinstjohn@gmail.com
*
E-mail: dfazio2@unite.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is devoted to the investigation of term-definable connexive implications in substructural logics with exchange and, on the semantical perspective, in sub-varieties of commutative residuated lattices (FL${}_{\scriptsize\mbox{e}}$-algebras). In particular, we inquire into sufficient and necessary conditions under which generalizations of the connexive implication-like operation defined in [6] for Heyting algebras still satisfy connexive theses. It will turn out that, in most cases, connexive principles are equivalent to the equational Glivenko property with respect to Boolean algebras. Furthermore, we provide some philosophical upshots like, e.g., a discussion on the relevance of the above operation in relationship with G. Polya’s logic of plausible inference, and some characterization results on weak and strong connexivity.

Keywords

connexive logicresiduated latticesGlivenko propertysubstructural logicsweakly connexive logicstrong connexivity

MSC classification

Primary: 03A10: Logic in the philosophy of science 03B47: Substructural logics (including relevance, entailment, linear logic, Lambek calculus, BCK and BCI logics) 03B55: Intermediate logics 03B60: Other nonclassical logic
Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Symbolic Logic , First View , pp. 1 - 32
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Symbolic Logic

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arieli, O., Avron, A., & Zamansky, A. (2011). Ideal paraconsistent logics. Studia Logica, 99, 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blok, W. J., & Pigozzi, D. (1989). Algebraizable Logics. Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burris, S., & Sankappanavar, H. P. (1981). A Course in Universal Algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buszkowski, W. (1996). Categorial grammars with negative information. In Wansing, H., editor. Negation. A Notion in Focus. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantwell, J. (2008). The logic of conditional negation. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 49, 245–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, D., Ledda, A., & Paoli, F. (2023). Intuitionistic logic is a connexive logic. Studia Logica.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, D., & Odintsov, S. P. (2023). An algebraic investigation of the connexive logic $\textsf{C}$ . Studia Logica.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Font, J. (2016). Abstract Algebraic Logic: An Introductory Textbook. London: College Publications.Google Scholar
Galatos, N., Jipsen, P., Kowalski, T., & Ono, H. (2007). Residuated Lattices: An Algebraic Glimpse at Substructural Logics. Studies in Logic and the Foundation of Mathematics, Vol. 151. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Galatos, N., & Ono, H. (2006). Algebraization, parametrized local deduction theorem and interpolation for substructural logics over FL. Studia Logica, 83, 279–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherardi, G., & Orlandelli, E. (2021). Super-strict implications. Bulletin of the Section of Logic, 50(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humberstone, L. (2000). Contra-classical logics. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 78(4), 438–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapsner, A. (2012). Strong Connexivity. Thought, 1, 141–145.Google Scholar
Kapsner, A. (2022). Connexivity and the pragmatics of conditionals. Erkenntnis, 87, 2745–2778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapsner, A., & Omori, H. (2017). Counterfactuals in Nelson logic. In Proceedings of LORI 2017. Berlin: Springer, pp. 497–511.Google Scholar
Mangraviti, F., & Tedder, A. (2023). Consistent theories in inconsistent logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 52, 1133–1148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marcos, J. (2005). On negation: Pure local rules. Journal of Applied Logic, 3, 185–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCall, S. (1975). Connexive implication. §29.8. In Anderson, A. R., & Belnap, N. D., editors. Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, Vol. 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 434–446.Google Scholar
McCall, S. (2012). A history of connexivity. In Gabbay, D. M., Pelletier, F. J., & Woods, J., editors. Handbook of the History of Logic, Vol. 11. Oxford: North-Holland, pp. 415–449.Google Scholar
Paoli, F. (2011). Substructural Logics: A Primer. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Pfeifer, N. (2012). Experiments on Aristotle’s thesis: Towards an experimental philosophy of conditionals. The Monist, 95, 223–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfeifer, N., & Tulkki, L. (2017). Conditionals, counterfactuals, and rational reasoning. An experimental study on basic principles. Minds and Machines, 27, 119–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzi, C. (1991). Decision procedures for logics of consequential implication. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 32, 618–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pizzi, C. (2005). Aristotle’s thesis between paraconsistency and modalization. Journal of Applied Logic, 3(1), 119–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polya, G. (1949). Preliminary remarks on a logic of plausible inference. Dialectica, 3, 28–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polya, G. (1990). Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, 2 Vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Routley, R. (1978). Semantics for connexive logics. I. Studia Logica, 37, 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wansing, H. (2005). Connexive modal logic. In Schmidt, R., Pratt-Hartmann, I, Reynolds, M, and Wansing, H, editors. Advances in Modal Logic, Vol. 5. London: King’s College Publications, pp. 367–383.Google Scholar
Wansing, H. (2006). Connexive logic. In Zalta, E. N., editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 Edition). Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Available from: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/logic-connexive/.Google Scholar
Wansing, H. (2007). A note on negation in categorial grammar. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 13(3), 271–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wansing, H., & Odintsov, S. (2016). On the methodology of paraconsistent logic. In Andreas, H., & Verdée, P., editors. Logical Studies of Paraconsistent Reasoning in Science and Mathematics. Trends in Logic, Vol. 45. Cham: Springer, pp. 175–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wansing, H., & Omori, H. (2019). Connexive logics. An overview and current trends. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 28, 371–387.Google Scholar
Wansing, H., & Unterhuber, M. (2019). Connexive conditional logic. Part I. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 28, 567–610.Google Scholar
Young, W. (2015). From interior algebras to unital $\ell$ -groups: A unifying treatment of modal residuated lattices. Studia Logica, 103, 265–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar