Achille C. Varzi
Columbia University
There are two natural ways of thinking about negation: (i) as a form of complementation and (ii) as an operation of reversal, or inversion (to deny that p is to say that things are “the other way around”). A variety of techniques exist to model conception (i), from Euler and Venn diagrams to Boolean algebras. Conception (ii), by contrast, has not been given comparable attention. In this note we outline a twofold geometric proposal, where the inversion metaphor is understoood as involving a rotation o a reflection, respectively. These two options are equivalent in classical two-valued logic but they differ significantly in many-valued logics. Here we show that they correspond to two basic sorts of negation operators—Post’s and Kleene’s—and we provide a simple group-theoretic argument demonstrating their generative power.
Keywords Negation
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2003
DOI 10.3166/jancl.13.9-19
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,037
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

A Natural History of Negation.Laurence Horn - 1989 - University of Chicago Press.
Facts and Propositions.F. P. Ramsey - 1927 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 7 (1):153-170.
Many-Valued Logic.Nicholas Rescher - 1969 - New York: Mcgraw-Hill.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Negation and Dichotomy.Fabien Schang (ed.) - 2009 - Bydgoszcz: Kazimierz Wielki University Press.
Negating as Turning Upside Down.Bartłomiej Skowron & Wiesław Kubiś - 2018 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 54 (1):115-129.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
100 ( #108,989 of 2,454,408 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #179,336 of 2,454,408 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes