Constructive Logic is Connexive and Contradictory

IF 0.6 Q2 LOGIC
Heinrich Wansing
{"title":"Constructive Logic is Connexive and Contradictory","authors":"Heinrich Wansing","doi":"10.12775/llp.2024.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is widely accepted that there is a clear sense in which the first-order paraconsistent constructive logic with strong negation of Almukdad and Nelson, QN4, is more constructive than intuitionistic first-order logic, QInt. While QInt and QN4 both possess the disjunction property and the existence property as characteristics of constructiveness (or constructivity), QInt lacks certain features of constructiveness enjoyed by QN4, namely the constructible falsity property and the dual of the existence property.\nThis paper deals with the constructiveness of the contra-classical, connexive, paraconsistent, and contradictory non-trivial first-order logic QC, which is a connexive variant of QN4. It is shown that there is a sense in which QC is even more constructive than QN4. The argument focuses on a problem that is mirror-inverted to Raymond Smullyan’s drinker paradox, namely the invalidity of what will be called the drinker truism and its dual in QN4 (and QInt), and on a version of the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov interpretation of the logical operations that treats proofs and disproofs on a par. The validity of the drinker truism and its dual together with the greater constructiveness of QC in comparison to QN4 may serve as further motivation for the study of connexive logics and suggests that constructive logic is connexive and contradictory (the latter understood as being negation inconsistent).","PeriodicalId":43501,"journal":{"name":"Logic and Logical Philosophy","volume":"136 28","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Logic and Logical Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12775/llp.2024.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LOGIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is widely accepted that there is a clear sense in which the first-order paraconsistent constructive logic with strong negation of Almukdad and Nelson, QN4, is more constructive than intuitionistic first-order logic, QInt. While QInt and QN4 both possess the disjunction property and the existence property as characteristics of constructiveness (or constructivity), QInt lacks certain features of constructiveness enjoyed by QN4, namely the constructible falsity property and the dual of the existence property. This paper deals with the constructiveness of the contra-classical, connexive, paraconsistent, and contradictory non-trivial first-order logic QC, which is a connexive variant of QN4. It is shown that there is a sense in which QC is even more constructive than QN4. The argument focuses on a problem that is mirror-inverted to Raymond Smullyan’s drinker paradox, namely the invalidity of what will be called the drinker truism and its dual in QN4 (and QInt), and on a version of the Brouwer-Heyting-Kolmogorov interpretation of the logical operations that treats proofs and disproofs on a par. The validity of the drinker truism and its dual together with the greater constructiveness of QC in comparison to QN4 may serve as further motivation for the study of connexive logics and suggests that constructive logic is connexive and contradictory (the latter understood as being negation inconsistent).
建构逻辑是相辅相成、自相矛盾的
人们普遍认为,在某种意义上,阿尔穆克达德和纳尔逊的强否定一阶准一致构造逻辑 QN4 比直观一阶逻辑 QInt 更具有构造性。虽然 QInt 和 QN4 都具有作为构造性(或建构性)特征的析取性质和存在性质,但 QInt 缺乏 QN4 所享有的某些构造性特征,即可构造的虚假性性质和存在性质的对偶。它表明,在某种意义上,QC 比 QN4 更具有构造性。论证的重点是雷蒙德-斯穆利安(Raymond Smullyan)的饮酒者悖论的镜像反转问题,即 QN4(和 QInt)中所谓的饮酒者真理及其对偶的无效性,以及将证明和反证等同对待的逻辑运算的布劳威尔-海廷-科尔莫戈罗夫解释版本。酒徒真言及其对偶的有效性,以及 QC 与 QN4 相比更强的构造性,可以进一步推动对互否逻辑的研究,并表明构造逻辑是互否和矛盾的(后者被理解为否定不一致)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
40.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信