On Pairs of Dual Consequence Operations

Logica Universalis 5 (2):177-203 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the paper, the authors discuss two kinds of consequence operations characterized axiomatically. The first one are consequence operations of the type Cn + that, in the intuitive sense, are infallible operations, always leading from accepted (true) sentences of a deductive system to accepted (true) sentences of the deductive system (see Tarski in Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 37:361–404, 1930, Comptes Rendus des Séances De la Société des Sciences et des Lettres de Varsovie 23:22–29, 1930; Pogorzelski and Słupecki in Stud Logic 9:163–176, 1960, Stud Logic 10:77–95, 1960). The second kind are dual consequence operations of the type Cn − that can be regarded as anti-infallible operations leading from non-accepted (rejected, false) sentences of a deductive system to non-accepted (rejected, false) sentences of the system (see Słupecki in Funkcja Łukasiewicza, 33–40, 1959; Wybraniec-Skardowska in Teoria zdań odrzuconych, 5–131, Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Inżynierskiej w Opolu, Seria Matematyka 4(81):35–61, 1983, Ann Pure Appl Logic 127:243–266, 2004, in On the notion and function of rejected propositions, 179–202, 2005). The operations of the types Cn + and Cn − can be ordinary finitistic consequence operations or unit consequence operations. A deductive system can be characterized in two ways by the following triple: $$\begin{array}{ll}{\rm by\,the\,triple}:\hspace{1.4cm} (+ , -)\hspace{0,6cm} \\ {\rm or\,by\,the\,triple}:\hspace{1.0cm} (-, +)\hspace{0,6cm} .\end{array}$$ We compare axiom systems for operations of the types Cn + and Cn −, give some methodological properties of deductive systems defined by means of these operations (e.g. consistency, completeness, decidability in Łukasiewicz’s sense), as well as formulate different metatheorems concerning them

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,928

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

Some remarks on axiomatizing logical consequence operations.Jacek Malinowski - 2005 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 14 (1):103-117.
Logical Consequence in Modal Logic.John Corcoran & George Weaver - 1969 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 10 (4):370-384.
P-consequence versus q-consequence operations.Szymon Frankowski - 2004 - Bulletin of the Section of Logic 33 (4):197-207.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
34 (#470,159)

6 months
5 (#639,324)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Rejection in Łukasiewicz's and Słupecki's Sense.Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska - 2018 - In Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska & Ángel Garrido (eds.), The Lvov-Warsaw School. Past and Present. Cham, Switzerland: Springer- Birkhauser,. pp. 575-597.
A meta-logic of inference rules: Syntax.Alex Citkin - 2015 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 24 (3).

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Dual counterparts of consequence operations.Ryszard Wójcicki - 1973 - Bulletin of the Section of Logic 2 (1):54-57.
Refutation calculi for certain intermediate propositional logics.Tomasz Skura - 1992 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 33 (4):552-560.
A refutation theory.Tomasz Skura - 2009 - Logica Universalis 3 (2):293-302.

View all 13 references / Add more references