Substitution inconsistencies in Transparent Intensional Logic

Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 31 (3-4):355-371 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper presents several important results for Transparent Intensional Logic (TIL). The conversions that are standardly taken to be valid – namely restricted β-conversion by name and β-reduction by value – are shown to be invalid. The core principle on which their validity is based – the so-called Compensation Principle – is also shown to be invalid. Further, the paper demonstrates the flaws of the proof of the Compensation Principle.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

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

O smyslu nesmyslu.Petr Kuchyňka - 1999 - Filosoficky Casopis 47:885-899.
Can concepts be defined in terms of sets?Marie Duží & Pavel Materna - 2010 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 19 (3):195-242.
Non-Constructive Procedural Theory of Propositional Problems and the Equivalence of Solutions.Ivo Pezlar - 2019 - In Igor Sedlár & Martin Blicha (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2018. London: College Publications. pp. 197-210.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-09-29

Downloads
10 (#1,165,120)

6 months
2 (#1,232,442)

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