Ternary relations and relevant semantics

Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 127 (1-3):195-217 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Modus ponens provides the central theme. There are laws, of the form A→C. A logic L collects such laws. Any datum A provides input to the laws of L. The central ternary relation R relates theories L,T and U, where U consists of all of the outputs C got by applying modus ponens to major premises from L and minor premises from T. Underlying this relation is a modus ponens product operation on theories L and T, whence RLTU iff LTU. These ideas have been expressed, especially with Routley, as worlds semantics for relevant and other substructural logics.Worlds are best demythologized as theories, subject to truth-functional and other constraints. The chief constraint is that theories are taken as closed under logical entailment, which clearly begs the question if we are using the semantics to determine which theory L is Logic itself. Instead we draw the modal logicians’ conclusion—there are many substructural logics, each with its appropriate ternary relational postulates.Each logic L gives rise to a Calculus of L-theories, on which particular candidate logical axioms have the combinatorial properties expected from the well-known Curry–Howard isomorphism . We apply their bubbling lemma, updating the Fools Model of Combinatory Logic at the pure → level for the system BT. We make fusion an explicit connective, proving a combinator correspondence theorem. Having taken relevant → as a left residual for , we explore its right residual mate →r. Finally we concentrate on and prove a finite model property for the classical minimal relevant logic CB, a conservative extension of the minimal positive relevant logic B+

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,758

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Relational proof system for relevant logics.Ewa Orlowska - 1992 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (4):1425-1440.
“Four-Valued” Semantics for the Relevant Logic R.Edwin D. Mares - 2004 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (3):327-341.
Interpretation of relevant logics in a logic of ternary relations.E. Orlowska - 1990 - Bulletin of the Section of Logic 19 (No2):39-49.
A star-free semantics for R.Edwin D. Mares - 1995 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 60 (2):579 - 590.
A relevant theory of conditionals.Edwin D. Mares & André Fuhrmann - 1995 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 24 (6):645 - 665.
The Ramsey test and conditional semantics.Frank Döring - 1997 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (4):359-376.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-16

Downloads
48 (#338,876)

6 months
9 (#351,255)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

From Hilbert proofs to consecutions and back.Tore Fjetland Øgaard - 2021 - Australasian Journal of Logic 18 (2):51-72.
Weakly associative relation algebras hold the key to the universe.Tomasz Kowalski - 2007 - Bulletin of the Section of Logic 36 (3/4):145-157.
Current Trends in Substructural Logics.Katalin Bimbó - 2015 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 44 (6):609-624.
Constrained Consequence.Katarina Britz, Johannes Heidema & Ivan Varzinczak - 2011 - Logica Universalis 5 (2):327-350.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I. Normal Propositional Calculi.Saul A. Kripke - 1963 - Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9 (5‐6):67-96.
Logic for equivocators.David Lewis - 1982 - Noûs 16 (3):431-441.
The Mathematics of Sentence Structure.Joachim Lambek - 1958 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 65 (3):154-170.
Semantics for relevant logics.Alasdair Urquhart - 1972 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 37 (1):159-169.
The semantics of entailment — III.Richard Routley & Robert K. Meyer - 1972 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 1 (2):192 - 208.

View all 14 references / Add more references