It is assumed that a Kripke–Joyal semantics \({\mathcal{A} = \left\langle \mathbb{C},{\rm Cov}, {\it F},\Vdash \right\rangle}\) has been defined for a first-order language \({\mathcal{L}}\) . To transform \({\mathbb{C}}\) into a Heyting algebra \({\overline{\mathbb{C}}}\) on which the forcing relation is preserved, a standard construction is used to obtain a complete Heyting algebra made up of cribles of \({\mathbb{C}}\) . A pretopology \({\overline{{\rm Cov}}}\) is defined on \({\overline{\mathbb{C}}}\) using the pretopology on \({\mathbb{C}}\) . A sheaf \({\overline{{\it F}}}\) is made up of (...) sections of F that obey functoriality. A forcing relation \({\overline{\Vdash}}\) is defined and it is shown that \({\overline{\mathcal{A}} = \left\langle \overline{\mathbb{C}},\overline{\rm{Cov}},\overline{{\it F}}, \overline{\Vdash} \right\rangle }\) is a Kripke–Joyal semantics that faithfully preserves the notion of forcing of \({\mathcal{A}}\) . That is to say, an object a of \({\mathbb{C}Ob}\) forces a sentence with respect to \({\mathcal{A}}\) if and only if the maximal a-crible forces it with respect to \({\overline{\mathcal{A}}}\) . This reduces a Kripke–Joyal semantics defined over an arbitrary site to a Kripke–Joyal semantics defined over a site which is based on a complete Heyting algebra. (shrink)

am going to discuss some issues inspired by a well-known paper ofKeith Donnellan, "Reference and Definite Descriptions,”2 but the interest—to me—of the contrast mentioned in my title goes beyond Donnellan's paper: I think it is of considerable constructive as well as critical importance to the philosophy oflanguage. These applications, however, and even everything I might want to say relative to Donnellan’s paper, cannot be discussed in full here because of problems of length. Moreover, although I have a considerable interest in (...) the substantive issues raised by Donnellan’s paper, and by related literature, my own conclusions will be methodological, not substantive. I can put the matter this way: Donnellan’s paper claims to give decisive objections both to Russell’s theory of definite descriptions (taken as a theory about English) and to Strawson’s. My concem is not primarily with the question; is Donnellan right, or is Russell (or Strawson)? Rather, it is with the question: do the considerations in Donneilarfs paper refute Russell’s theory (or Strawson’s)? For definiteness, I will concentrate on Donnellan versus Russell, leaving Strawson aside. And about this issue I will draw a definite conclusion, one which I think will illuminate a few methodological maxims about language. Namely, I will conclude that the considerations in Donnellan’s paper, by themselves, do not refute Russell’s theory. Any conclusions about Russell’s views per se, or Donnellan’s, must be tentative, IfI were to be asked for a tentative stab about Russell, I would say that although his theory does a far better job of handling ordinary discourse than many have thought, and although many popular arguments against it are inconclusive, probably it ultimately fails. The considerations I have in mind have to do with the existence of “improper” definite descriptions, such as “the table," where uniquely specifying conditions are not contained in the description itself.. (shrink)

Reference and Existence, Saul Kripke's John Locke Lectures for 1973, can be read as a sequel to his classic Naming and Necessity. It confronts important issues left open in that work -- among them, the semantics of proper names and natural kind terms as they occur in fiction and in myth; negative existential statements; the ontology of fiction and myth. In treating these questions, he makes a number of methodological observations that go beyond the framework of his earlier book (...) -- including the striking claim that fiction cannot provide a test for theories of reference and naming. In addition, these lectures provide a glimpse into the transition to the pragmatics of singular reference that dominated his influential paper, " Speaker's Reference and Semantic Reference " -- a paper that helped reorient linguistic and philosophical semantics. Some of the themes have been worked out in later writings by other philosophers -- many influenced by typescripts of the lectures in circulation -- but none have approached the careful, systematic treatment provided here. The virtuosity of Naming and Necessity -- the colloquial ease of the tone, the dazzling, on-the-spot formulations, the logical structure of the overall view gradually emerging over the course of the lectures -- is on display here as well. (shrink)

Această lucrare oferă o expunere a unor trăsături ale unei teorii semantice a logicilor modale. Pentru o anumită extensiune cuantificată a S5, această teorie a fost prezentată în ‘A Completeness Theorem in Modal Logic’ şi a fost rezumată în ‘Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic’ . Lucrarea de faţă se va concentra asupra unui aspect particular al teoriei – introducerea cuantificatorilor – şi se va restrînge în principal la o metodă particulară de a atinge acest scop. Accentul lucrării va fi pur (...) semantic şi în consecinţă se va omite folosirea tablourilor semantice, care este esenţială pentru o prezentare completă a teoriei . De asemenea, se va renunţa în mare parte la demonstraţii. (shrink)

This paper is dedicated to the memory of Mike Dunn. His untimely death is a loss not only to logic, computer science, and philosophy, but to all of us who knew and loved him. The paper gives an argument for closure under γ in standard systems of relevance logic (first proved by Meyer and Dunn 1969). For definiteness, I chose the example of R. The proof also applies to E and to the quantified systems RQ and EQ. The argument uses (...) semantic tableaux (with one exceptional rule not satisfying the subformula property). It avoids the previous arguments’ use of cutting down inconsistent sets of formulas to consistent sets. Like all tableau arguments, it extends partial valuations to total valuations. (shrink)

Many systems of quantified modal logic cannot be characterised by Kripke's well-known possible worlds semantic analysis. This book shows how they can be characterised by a more general 'admissible semantics', using models in which there is a restriction on which sets of worlds count as propositions. This requires a new interpretation of quantifiers that takes into account the admissibility of propositions. The author sheds new light on the celebrated Barcan Formula, whose role becomes that of legitimising the Kripkean interpretation (...) of quantification. The theory is worked out for systems with quantifiers ranging over actual objects, and over all possibilia, and for logics with existence and identity predicates and definite descriptions. The final chapter develops a new admissible 'cover semantics' for propositional and quantified relevant logic, adapting ideas from the Kripke-Joyal semantics for intuitionistic logic in topos theory. This book is for mathematical or philosophical logicians, computer scientists and linguists. (shrink)

This paper deals with Kripke-style semantics for many-valued logics. We introduce various types of Kripke semantics, and we connect them with algebraic semantics. As for modal logics, we relate the axioms of logics extending MTL to properties of the Kripke frames in which they are valid. We show that in the propositional case most logics are complete but not strongly complete with respect to the corresponding class of complete Kripke frames, whereas in the predicate case there are (...) important many-valued logics like BL, Ł and Π, which are not even complete with respect to the class of all predicate Kripke frames in which they are valid. Thus although very natural, Kripke semantics seems to be slightly less powerful than algebraic semantics. (shrink)

There are two problematic assumptions in Kripke’s semantic argument against descriptivism. Assumption 1 is that the referential relation of a name to an object is only an objective or metaphysical relation between language and the world; it has nothing to do with the understanding of the name by our linguistic community. Assumption 2 is that descriptivism has to hold that, if name a has its meaning and the meaning is given by one description or a cluster of descriptions, the description (...) should supply a set of necessary and sufficient conditions for determining what a designates; and that it is possible for us to find out such a setof conditions. Emphasizing the sociality, intentionality, conventionality and historicity of language and meaning, this paper rejects Assumption 1, and argues that Assumption 2 is an unfair interpretation of descriptivism, and it is not necessary for descriptivists to hold Assumption 2. This paper finally concludes that Kripke’s semantic argument against descriptivism fails. (shrink)

We present here a Kripke-style semantics for propositional orthomodular logics that is based on the representation theorem for orthomodular lattices by D.J. Foulis , in which a sort of semigroups is employed. This semantics can characterize the logics above the orthomodular logic by some elementary conditions.

Kripke bundle [3] and C-set semantics [1] [2] are known as semantics which generalize standard Kripke semantics. In [3] and in [1], [2] it is shown that Kripke bundle and C-set semantics are stronger than standard Kripke semantics. Also it is true that C-set semantics for superintuitionistic logics is stronger than Kripke bundle semantics [5].In this paper, we show that Q-S4.1 is not Kripke bundle complete via C-set models. As a corollary we can (...) give a simple proof showing that C-set semantics for modal logics are stronger than Kripke bundle semantics. (shrink)

This paper deals with one kind of Kripke-style semantics, which we shall call algebraic Kripke-style semantics, for relevance logics. We first recall the logic R of relevant implication and some closely related systems, their corresponding algebraic structures, and algebraic completeness results. We provide simpler algebraic completeness proofs. We then introduce various types of algebraic Kripke-style semantics for these systems and connect them with algebraic semantics.

Classical logic, intuitionism, relevant logics and many other systems try to express implication as an entailment. The Jaskowski system Qf describes implication in connection with causality. Syntactic properties of Qf have been examined by Pieczkowski [4], [5]. The semantic characterization of Qf is the aim of this paper.

This article investigates Kripke-style semantics for two sorts of logics: pseudo-Boolean and weak-Boolean logics. As examples of the first, we introduce G3 and S53pB.G3 is the three-valued Dummett–Gödel logic; S53pB is the modal logic S5 but with its orthonegation replaced by a pB negation. Examples of wB logic are G3wB and S53wB.G3wB is G3 with a wB negation in place of its pB negation; S53wB is S5 with a wB negation replacing its orthonegation. For each system, we provide a (...) three-valued Kripke-style semantics with and without star operation . We prove soundness and completeness theorems in each case. Note that wB logics may be equivalent to logics with Baaz’s projection Δ. We finally introduce the G3 and the S53pB both with Δ and show that they are equivalent to G3wB and S53wB, respectively. (shrink)

This article presents an approach to the semantics of non-distributive propositional logics that is based on a lattice representation theorem that delivers a canonical extension of the lattice. Our approach supports both a plain Kripke-style semantics and, by restriction, a general frame semantics. Unlike the framework of generalized Kripke frames, the semantic approach presented in this article is suitable for modeling applied logics, as it respects the intended interpretation of the logical operators. This is made possible by (...) restricting admissible interpretations. (shrink)

In the present paper we examine very weak modal logics C1, D1, E1, S0.5◦, S0.5◦+(D), S0.5 and some of their versions which are closed under replacement of tautological equivalents (rte-versions). We give semantics for these logics, formulated by means of Kripke style models of the form , where w is a «distinguished» world, A is a set of worlds which are alternatives to w, and V is a valuation which for formulae and worlds assigns the truth-vales such that: (i) (...) for all formulae and all worlds, V preserves classical conditions for truth-value operators; (ii) for the world w and any formula ϕ, V(⬜ϕ,w) = 1 iff ∀x∈A V(ϕ,x) = 1; (iii) for other worlds formula ⬜ϕ has an arbitrary value. Moreover, for rte-versions of considered logics we must add the following condition: (iv) V(⬜χ,w) = V(⬜χ[ϕ/ψ],w), if ϕ and ψ are tautological equivalent. Finally, for C1, D1and E1 we must add queer models of the form in which: (i) holds and (ii') V(⬜ϕ,w) = 0, for any formula ϕ. We prove that considered logics are determined by some classes of above models. (shrink)

Kripke bundle and C-set semantics are known as semantics which generalize standard Kripke semantics. In [4] and in [1, 2] it is shown that Kripke bundle and C-set semantics are stronger than standard Kripke semantics. Also it is true that C-set semantics for superintuitionistic logics is stronger than Kripke bundle semantics . Modal predicate logic Q-S4.1 is not Kripke bundle complete of the present paper). This is shown by using difference of Kripke bundle (...) semantics and C-set semantics. In this paper, by using the same idea we show that incompleteness results in Kripke bundle semantics which are extended versions of [2]. (shrink)

‘Natural kind essentialism’—here defined as the view that (i) the existence of natural kinds is a mind- and theory-independent matter, (ii) their essences are intrinsic, and (iii) they have a hierarchical structure—is commonly thought to be justified by appeal to Kripke–Putnam semantics, according to which propositions like ‘water is H20’ are necessary a posteriori. This chapter argues that the Kripke–Putnam semantics is in fact compatible with the denial of each of the three tenets of natural kind essentialism. The (...) basic argument is that, assuming the range of natural kinds goes beyond those kinds for which we have vernacular names, deference to scientific theories is required in fixing the reference of natural kind terms. That those theories describe mind- and theory-independent reality, and that they do not admit a non-hierarchical structure for the categories they deploy, are theses that are independent of anything derivable from Kripke–Putnam semantics itself. (shrink)

Recent studies in semantics of modal and superintuitionistic predicate logics provided many examples of incompleteness, especially for Kripke semantics. So there is a problem: to find an appropriate possible- world semantics which is equivalent to Kripke semantics at the propositional level and which is strong enough to prove general completeness results. The present paper introduces a new semantics of Kripke metaframes' generalizing some earlier notions. The main innovation is in considering "n"-tuples of individuals as abstract (...) "n"-dimensional vectors', together with some transformations of these vectors. Soundness of the semantics is proved to be equivalent to some non- logical properties of metaframes; and thus we describe the maximal semantics of Kripke- type. (shrink)

In so-called Kripke-type models, each sentence is assigned either to true or to false at each possible world. In this setting, every possible world has the two-valued Boolean algebra as the set of truth values. Instead, we take a collection of algebras each of which is attached to a world as the set of truth values at the world, and obtain an extended semantics based on the traditional Kripke-type semantics, which we call here the algebraic Kripke semantics. (...) We introduce algebraic Kripke sheaf semantics for super-intuitionistic and modal predicate logics, and discuss some basic properties. We can state the Gödel-McKinsey-Tarski translation theorem within this semantics. Further, we show new results on super-intuitionistic predicate logics. We prove that there exists a continuum of super-intuitionistic predicate logics each of which has both of the disjunction and existence properties and moreover the same propositional fragment as the intuitionistic logic. (shrink)

Kripke; possible-world semantics; pure and applied semantics; models of modal space; applicability.

This note contains a correct proof of the fact that the set of all first-order formulas which are valid in all predicate Kripke frames for Hájek's many-valued logic BL is not arithmetical. The result was claimed in [5], but the proof given there was incorrect.

In his influential Naming and Necessity lectures, Saul Kripke made new sense of modal statements: “Kant might have been a bachelor”, “Königsberg is necessarily identical with Kaliningrad”. Many took the notions he introduced-metaphysical necessity and rigid designation -- to herald new metaphysical issues and have important consequences. In fact, the Kripkean insight is at bottom semantic, rather than metaphysical: it is part of how proper names work that they purport to refer to individuals to whom modal properties can be ascribed. (...) We can see this by reflecting on analytic truths that ground modal claims like the two examples above. (shrink)

Pietruszczak (Bull Sect Log 38(3/4):163–171, 2009) proved that the normal logics K45 , KB4 (=KB5), KD45 are determined by suitable classes of simplified Kripke frames of the form ⟨W,A⟩ , where A⊆W. In this paper, we extend this result. Firstly, we show that a modal logic is determined by a class composed of simplified frames if and only if it is a normal extension of K45. Furthermore, a modal logic is a normal extension of K45 (resp. KD45; KB4; S5) if (...) and only if it is determined by a set consisting of finite simplified frames (resp. such frames with A≠∅; such frames with A=W or A=∅; such frames with A=W). Secondly, for all normal extensions of K45, KB4, KD45 and S5, in particular for extensions obtained by adding the so-called “verum” axiom, Segerberg’s formulas and/or their T-versions, we prove certain versions of Nagle’s Fact (J Symbol Log 46(2):319–328, 1981) (which concerned normal extensions of K5). Thirdly, we show that these extensions are determined by certain classes of finite simplified frames generated by finite subsets of the set N of natural numbers. In the case of extensions with Segerberg’s formulas and/or their T-versions these classes are generated by certain finite subsets of N. (shrink)

Grishin algebras are a generalisation of Boolean algebras that provide algebraic models for classical bilinear logic with two mutually cancelling negation connectives. We show how to build complete Grishin algebras as algebras of certain subsets (“propositions”) of cover systems that use an orthogonality relation to interpret the negations. The variety of Grishin algebras is shown to be closed under MacNeille completion, and this is applied to embed an arbitrary Grishin algebra into the algebra of all propositions of some cover system, (...) by a map that preserves all existing joins and meets. This representation is then used to give a cover system semantics for a version of classical bilinear logic that has first-order quantifiers and infinitary conjunctions and disjunctions. (shrink)

Some properties of Kripke-sheaf semantics for super-intuitionistic predicate logics are shown. The concept ofp-morphisms between Kripke sheaves is introduced. It is shown that if there exists ap-morphism from a Kripke sheaf 1 into 2 then the logic characterized by 1 is contained in the logic characterized by 2. Examples of Kripke-sheaf complete and finitely axiomatizable super-intuitionistic (and intermediate) predicate logics each of which is Kripke-frame incomplete are given. A correction to the author's previous paper Kripke bundles for intermediate predicate (...) logics and Kripke frames for intuitionistic modal logics (Studia Logica, 49(1990), pp. 289–306 ) is stated. (shrink)

This paper deals with substructural nuclear (image-based) logics and their algebraic and Kripke-style semantics. More precisely, we first introduce a class of substructural logics with connective N satisfying nucleus property, called here substructural nuclear logics, and its subclass, called here substructural nuclear image-based logics, where N further satisfies homomorphic image property. We then consider their algebraic semantics together with algebraic characterizations of those logics. Finally, we introduce operational Kripke-style semantics for those logics and provide two sorts of (...) completeness results for them, one of which is based on algebraic completeness for all the logics and the other of which is based on set-theoretic one for the nuclear image-based logics. (shrink)

Gelfand quantales are complete unital quantales with an involution, *, satisfying the property that for any element a, if a b a for all b, then a a* a = a. A Hilbert-style axiom system is given for a propositional logic, called Gelfand Logic, which is sound and complete with respect to Gelfand quantales. A Kripke semantics is presented for which the soundness and completeness of Gelfand logic is shown. The completeness theorem relies on a Stone style representation theorem (...) for complete lattices. A Rasiowa/Sikorski style semantic tableau system is also presented with the property that if all branches of a tableau are closed, then the formula in question is a theorem of Gelfand Logic. An open branch in a completed tableaux guarantees the existence of an Kripke model in which the formula is not valid; hence it is not a theorem of Gelfand Logic. (shrink)

A well-known polymodal provability logic inlMMLBox due to Japaridze is complete w.r.t. the arithmetical semantics where modalities correspond to reflection principles of restricted logical complexity in arithmetic. This system plays an important role in some recent applications of provability algebras in proof theory. However, an obstacle in the study of inlMMLBox is that it is incomplete w.r.t. any class of Kripke frames. In this paper we provide a complete Kripke semantics for inlMMLBox . First, we isolate a certain (...) subsystem inlMMLBox of inlMMLBox that is sound and complete w.r.t. a nice class of finite frames. Second, appropriate models for inlMMLBox are defined as the limits of chains of finite expansions of models for inlMMLBox . The techniques involves unions of n -elementary chains and inverse limits of Kripke models. All the results are obtained by purely modal-logical methods formalizable in elementary arithmetic. (shrink)

Kripke’s Wittgenstein is standardly understood as a non-factualist about meaning ascription. Non-factualism about meaning ascription is the idea that sentences like “Joe means addition by ‘plus’” are not used to state facts about the world. Byrne and Kusch have argued that Kripke’s Wittgenstein is not a non-factualist about meaning ascription. They are aware that their interpretation is non-standard, but cite arguments from Boghossian and Wright to support their view. Boghossian argues that non-factualism about meaning ascription is incompatible with a deflationary (...) theory of truth. Wright argues that non-factualism about meaning ascription is incoherent. To support the standard interpretation, I’ll respond to each argument in turn. To the degree that my responses are successful, Byrne and Kusch have an unmotivated interpretation of Kripke’s Wittgenstein. Wilson provides a factualist interpretation that is not based on Boghossian and Wright’s arguments. Miller argues for a non-factualist interpretation against Wilson, but I’ll show that Miller’s interpretation faces a dilemma. Miller’s argument cannot be maintained if a coherent interpretation of the skeptical solution is to be provided. I’ll show how this dilemma can be avoided and provide an independent argument against Wilson so that a non-factualist interpretation of the skeptical solution can be maintained. (shrink)