A Method of Generating Modal Logics Defining Jaśkowski’s Discussive Logic D2

Studia Logica 97 (1):161-182 (2011)

 Authors Andrzej Pietruszczak Nicolaus Copernicus University Abstract Jaśkowski’s discussive logic D2 was formulated with the help of the modal logic S5 as follows : \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${A \in {D_{2}}}$$\end{document} iff \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\rm S}5}$$\end{document}, where • is a translation of discussive formulae from Ford into the modal language. We say that a modal logic L defines D2 iff \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${{\rm D}_{2} = \{A \in {\rm For^{\rm d}} : \ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\it L}\}}$$\end{document}. In [14] and [10] were respectively presented the weakest normal and the weakest regular logic which : have the same theses beginning with ‘\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\diamond}$$\end{document}’ as S5. Of course, all logics fulfilling the above condition, define D2. In [10] it was prowed that in the cases of logics closed under congruence the following holds: defining D2 is equivalent to having the property. In this paper we show that this equivalence holds also for all modal logics which are closed under replacement of tautological equivalents.We give a general method which, for any class of modal logics determined by a set of joint axioms and rules, generates in the given class the weakest logic having the property. Thus, for the class of all modal logics we obtain the weakest modal logic which owns this property. On the other hand, applying the method to various classes of modal logics: rte-logics, congruential, monotonic, regular and normal, we obtain the weakest in a given class logic defining D2. Keywords Philosophy   Computational Linguistics   Mathematical Logic and Foundations   Logic Categories Logic and Philosophy of Logic (categorize this paper) ISBN(s) DOI 10.1007/s11225-010-9302-2 Options Mark as duplicate Export citation Request removal from index

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,735

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)

References found in this work BETA

Modal Logic: An Introduction.Brian F. Chellas - 1980 - Cambridge University Press.
Modal Logics in the Vicinity of S.Brian F. Chellas & Krister Segerberg - 1996 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37 (1):1-24.

Similar books and articles

On Modal Logics Defining Jaśkowski's D2-Consequence.Marek Nasieniewski & Andrzej Pietruszczak - 2013 - In Francesco Berto, Edwin Mares, Koji Tanaka & Francesco Paoli (eds.), Paraconsistency: Logic and Applications. Springer. pp. 141--161.
Approximations of Modal Logics: And Beyond.Guilherme de Souza Rabello & Marcelo Finger - 2008 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 152 (1):161-173.
The Logic of Pragmatic Truth.Newton C. A. Da Costa, Otávio Bueno & Steven French - 1998 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 27 (6):603-620.
Kripke Semantics for Modal Substructural Logics.Norihiro Kamide - 2002 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 11 (4):453-470.