On the calculus of relations

Journal of Symbolic Logic 6 (3):73-89 (1941)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The logical theory which is called thecalculus of (binary) relations, and which will constitute the subject of this paper, has had a strange and rather capricious line of historical development. Although some scattered remarks regarding the concept of relations are to be found already in the writings of medieval logicians, it is only within the last hundred years that this topic has become the subject of systematic investigation. The first beginnings of the contemporary theory of relations are to be found in the writings of A. De Morgan, who carried out extensive investigations in this domain in the fifties of the Nineteenth Century. De Morgan clearly realized the inadequacy of traditional logic for the expression and justification, not merely of the more intricate arguments of mathematics and the sciences, but even of simple arguments occurring in every-day life; witness his famous aphorism, that all the logic of Aristotle does not permit us, from the fact that a horse is an animal, to conclude that the head of a horse is the head of an animal. In his effort to break the bonds of traditional logic and to expand the limits of logical inquiry, he directed his attention to the general concept of relations and fully recognized its significance. Nevertheless, De Morgan cannot be regarded as the creator of the modern theory of relations, since he did not possess an adequate apparatus for treating the subject in which he was interested, and was apparently unable to create such an apparatus. His investigations on relations show a lack of clarity and rigor which perhaps accounts for the neglect into which they fell in the following years.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

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

Projective algebra and the calculus of relations.A. R. Bednarek & S. M. Ulam - 1978 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 43 (1):56-64.
λμ-calculus and Böhm's theorem.René David & Walter Py - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (1):407-413.
The modal object calculus and its interpretation.Edward N. Zalta - 1997 - In M. de Rijke (ed.), Advances in Intensional Logic. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 249--279.
A tale of four grammars.Claudia Casadio & Joachim Lambek - 2002 - Studia Logica 71 (3):315-329.
Postulates for the calculus of binary relations.J. C. C. McKinsey - 1940 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 5 (3):85-97.
The Situation Calculus: A Case for Modal Logic. [REVIEW]Gerhard Lakemeyer - 2010 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19 (4):431-450.
A Diagrammatic Calculus of Syllogisms.Ruggero Pagnan - 2012 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21 (3):347-364.
Varieties of linear calculi.Sara Negri - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (6):569-590.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
256 (#75,414)

6 months
21 (#116,730)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Entanglement and indistinguishability in a quantum ontology of properties.Sebastian Fortin & Olimpia Lombardi - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 91 (C):234-243.
Multi-dimensional modal logic.Maarten Marx - 1997 - Boston, Mass.: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Edited by Yde Venema.
A modal-Hamiltonian interpretation of quantum mechanics.Olimpia Lombardi & Mario Castagnino - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (2):380-443.
A modal-Hamiltonian interpretation of quantum mechanics.Olimpia Lombardi & Mario Castagnino - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (2):380-443.

View all 73 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

A Survey of Symbolic Logic.C. I. Lewis - 1918 - Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 17 (3):78-79.

Add more references