On defining necessity in terms of entailment

Studia Logica 38 (2):95 - 104 (1979)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In their book Entailment, Anderson and Belnap investigate the consequences of defining Lp (it is necessary that p) in system E as (pp)p. Since not all theorems are equivalent in E, this raises the question of whether there are reasonable alternative definitions of necessity in E. In this paper, it is shown that a definition of necessity in E satisfies the conditions { E Lpp, EL(pq)(LpLq), E pLp} if and only if its has the form C 1.C2 .... Cnp, where each C iis equivalent in E to either pp or ((pp)p)p.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
40 (#377,327)

6 months
5 (#526,961)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references