Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Semantics for RKt1

  • M. K. Rennie (a1)

Extract

In Chapter XIII of [4], Prior discusses a system QKt, designed to stand to the “minimal” tense logic Kt as the modal system Q of [3] stands to S5. In this paper I provide semantics for a similar system, slightly weaker than QKt: the weakening is due to the fact that Prior's axioms are slightly too strong for a “minimal” system. An extended post-Henkin style completeness proof for the axiomatization with respect to the semantics provided is then given: the underlying three-valued nature of the semantics requires a twist in the proof which is new to its author at least, and also results in some details being set out which could well be glossed over in the two-valued case.

Copyright

Footnotes

Hide All
1

For the detection of an error in the original, I want to thank Robert Bull: its correction is due to Dov Gabbay.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
[1]Hughes, G. E. and Cresswell, M. J., An introduction to modal logic, Methuen, London, 1968.
[2]Makinson, D. C., On some completeness theorems in modal logic, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 12 (1966), pp. 379384.
[3]Prior, A. N., Time and modality, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1957.
[4]Prior, A. N., Papers on time and tense, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1968.
[5]Rennie, M. K., On postulates for temporal order, The Monist, vol. 3 (1969), pp. 457468.

Semantics for RKt1

  • M. K. Rennie (a1)

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