A Family of Strict/Tolerant Logics

Journal of Philosophical Logic 50 (2):363-394 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Strict/tolerant logic, ST, evaluates the premises and the consequences of its consequence relation differently, with the premises held to stricter standards while consequences are treated more tolerantly. More specifically, ST is a three-valued logic with left sides of sequents understood as if in Kleene’s Strong Three Valued Logic, and right sides as if in Priest’s Logic of Paradox. Surprisingly, this hybrid validates the same sequents that classical logic does. A version of this result has been extended to meta, metameta, … consequence levels in Barrio et al.. In my earlier paper Fitting I showed that the original ideas behind ST are, in fact, much more general than first appeared, and an infinite family of many valued logics have Strict/Tolerant counterparts. This family includes both Kleene’s and Priest’s logic individually, as well as first degree entailment. For instance, for both the Kleene and the Priest logic, the corresponding strict/tolerant logic is six-valued, but with differing sets of strictly and tolerantly designated truth values. The present paper extends that generalization in two directions. We examine a reverse notion, of Tolerant/Strict logics, which exist for the same structures that were investigated in Fitting. And we show that the generalization extends through the meta, metameta, … consequence levels for the same infinite family of many valued logics. Finally we close with remarks on the status of cut and related rules, which can actually be rather nuanced. Throughout, the aim is not the philosophical applications of the Strict/Tolerant idea, but the determination of how general a phenomenon it is.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,891

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

The Strict/Tolerant Idea and Bilattices.Melvin Fitting - 2021 - In Ofer Arieli & Anna Zamansky (eds.), Arnon Avron on Semantics and Proof Theory of Non-Classical Logics. Springer Verlag. pp. 167-191.
On the Strict–Tolerant Conception of Truth.Stefan Wintein - 2014 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (1):1-20.
Many-valued reflexive autoepistemic logic.C. Koutras & S. Zachos - 2000 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 8 (1):33-54.
Deep ST.Thomas M. Ferguson & Elisángela Ramírez-Cámara - 2021 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 51 (6):1261-1293.
Tolerant, Classical, Strict.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):347-385.
Natural Deduction for Three-Valued Regular Logics.Yaroslav Petrukhin - 2017 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 26 (2):197–206.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-09-07

Downloads
50 (#309,908)

6 months
15 (#234,189)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Melvin Fitting
CUNY Graduate Center

References found in this work

Paradoxes and Failures of Cut.David Ripley - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (1):139 - 164.
Tolerant, Classical, Strict.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):347-385.
Classical Logic and the Strict Tolerant Hierarchy.Chris Scambler - 2020 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 49 (2):351-370.
The Logics of Strict-Tolerant Logic.Eduardo Barrio, Lucas Rosenblatt & Diego Tajer - 2015 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 44 (5):551-571.

View all 13 references / Add more references