Propositional Identity and Logical Necessity

Australasian Journal of Logic 2:1-11 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In two early papers, Max Cresswell constructed two formal logics of propositional identity, pcr and fcr, which he observed to be respectively deductively equivalent to modal logics s4 and s5. Cresswell argued informally that these equivalences respectively “give . . . evidence” for the correctness of s4 and s5 as logics of broadly logical necessity. In this paper, I describe weaker propositional identity logics than pcr that accommodate core intuitions about identity and I argue that Cresswell’s informal arguments do not firmly and without epistemic circularity justify accepting s4 or s5. I also describe how to formulate standard modal logics (k, s2, and their extensions) with strict equivalence as the only modal primitive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 78,094

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


Added to PP

32 (#373,706)

6 months
1 (#489,169)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David B. Martens
University of Witwatersrand

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Identity and necessity.Saul A. Kripke - 1971 - In Milton Karl Munitz (ed.), Identity and Individuation. New York: New York University Press. pp. 135-164.
Counterpart theory and quantified modal logic.David K. Lewis - 1968 - Journal of Philosophy 65 (5):113-126.
Relevant identity.Philip Kremer - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (2):199-222.
Propositional identity.M. J. Cresswell - 1967 - Logique Et Analyse 40:283-291.

View all 7 references / Add more references