Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Gentzenizations of relevant logics with distribution

  • Ross T. Brady (a1)

Extract

We establish cut-free left-handed Gentzenizations for a range of major relevant logics from B through to R, all with distribution. B is the basic system of the Routley-Meyer semantics (see [15], pp. 287–300) and R is the logic of relevant implication (see [1], p. 341). Previously, the contractionless logics DW, TW, EW, RW and RWK were Gentzenized in [3], [4] and [5], and also the distributionless logics LBQ, LDWQ, LTWQo, LEWQot, LRWQ, LRWKQ and LRQ in [6] and [7]. This paper provides Gentzenizations for the logics DJ, TJ, T and R, with various levels of contraction, and for the contractionless logic B, which could not be included in [4] using the technique developed there. We also include the Gentzenization of TW in order to compare it with that in [4]. The Gentzenizations that we obtain here for DW and RW are inferior to those already obtained in [4], but they are included for reference when constructing other systems. The logics EW and E present a difficulty for our method and are omitted. For background to the Gentzenization of relevant logics, see [6], and for motivation behind the logics involved, see [6], [1] and [15]. Because of the number of properties that are brought to bear in obtaining these systems, we prefer to consider Gentzenizations for particular logics rather than for arbitrary bunches of axioms.

Copyright

References

Hide All
[1]Anderson, A. R. and Belnap, N. D. Jr., Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity. Vol. 1, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1975.
[2]Belnap, N. D. Jr., Display logic, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 11 (1982), pp. 375417.
[3]Brady, R. T., The Gentzenization and decidability of RW, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 19 (1990), pp. 3573.
[4]Brady, R. T., Gentzenization and decidability of some contractionless relevant logics, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 20 (1991), pp. 97117.
[5]Brady, R. T., Simplified Gentzenizations for contractionless logics, Logique et Analyse, forthcoming.
[6]Brady, R. T., Gentzenizations of relevant logics without distribution. I, this Journal, later.
[7]Brady, R. T., Gentzenizations of relevant logics without distribution. II, this Journal, later.
[8]Fine, K., Semantics for quantified relevance logic, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 17 (1988), pp. 2759.
[9]Giambrone, G. and Meyer, R. K., Completeness and conservative extension results for some Boolean relevant logics, Studia Logica, vol. 48 (1989), pp. 114.
[10]Meyer, R. K., Meta-completeness, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 17 (1976), pp. 501517.
[11]Meyer, R. K. and Routley, R., Classical relevant logics. I, Studia Logica, vol. 32 (1973), pp. 5166.
[12]Brady, R. T., Classical relevant logics. II, Studia Logica, vol. 33 (1974), pp. 183194.
[13]Priest, G. and Sylvan, R., Simplified semantics for basic relevant logics, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 21 (1992), pp. 217232.
[14]Restall, G., Simplified semantics for relevant logics (and some of their rivals), Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 22 (1993), pp. 481511.
[15]Routley, R.et al., Relevant logics and their rivals, Vol. 1, Ridgeview, Atascadero, California, 1982.
[16]Slaney, J. K., A metacompleteness theorem for contraction-free relevant logics, Studia Logica, vol. 43 (1984), pp. 159168.
[17]Slaney, J. K., Reduced models for relevant logics without WI, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, vol. 28 (1987), pp. 395407.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed