{"title":"无切割模态后果理论","authors":"Edson Bezerra","doi":"10.1007/s44204-024-00220-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The cut-free validity theory <span>\\(\\textsf{STV}\\)</span> proposed by Barrio, Rosenblatt, and Tajer suffers from incompleteness with respect to its object language validity predicate. The validity predicate of <span>\\(\\textsf{STV}\\)</span> fails in validating some valid inferences of its underlying logic, the Strict Tolerant logic <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}\\)</span>. In this paper, we will present the non-normal modal logic <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}^{\\Box \\Diamond }\\)</span> whose modalities <span>\\(\\Box \\)</span> and <span>\\(\\Diamond \\)</span> capture the tautologies/valid inferences and the consistent formulas of the logic <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}\\)</span>, respectively. We show that <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}^{\\Box \\Diamond }\\)</span> does not trivialize when extended with self-referential devices. We also show that such a solution poses a dilemma. If we extend <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}^{\\Box \\Diamond }\\)</span> in such a way that it allows iterated modal formulas among its theorems, then the resulting interpretation of <span>\\(\\Box \\)</span> as validity implies that metametainferences of <span>\\(\\textsf{ST}\\)</span> behave like classical logic. On the other hand, if we allow these modalities to receive intermediate truth values, we obtain formulas incompatible with the proposed reading of <span>\\(\\Box \\)</span>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A cut-free modal theory of consequence\",\"authors\":\"Edson Bezerra\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44204-024-00220-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The cut-free validity theory <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{STV}\\\\)</span> proposed by Barrio, Rosenblatt, and Tajer suffers from incompleteness with respect to its object language validity predicate. The validity predicate of <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{STV}\\\\)</span> fails in validating some valid inferences of its underlying logic, the Strict Tolerant logic <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}\\\\)</span>. In this paper, we will present the non-normal modal logic <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}^{\\\\Box \\\\Diamond }\\\\)</span> whose modalities <span>\\\\(\\\\Box \\\\)</span> and <span>\\\\(\\\\Diamond \\\\)</span> capture the tautologies/valid inferences and the consistent formulas of the logic <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}\\\\)</span>, respectively. We show that <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}^{\\\\Box \\\\Diamond }\\\\)</span> does not trivialize when extended with self-referential devices. We also show that such a solution poses a dilemma. If we extend <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}^{\\\\Box \\\\Diamond }\\\\)</span> in such a way that it allows iterated modal formulas among its theorems, then the resulting interpretation of <span>\\\\(\\\\Box \\\\)</span> as validity implies that metametainferences of <span>\\\\(\\\\textsf{ST}\\\\)</span> behave like classical logic. On the other hand, if we allow these modalities to receive intermediate truth values, we obtain formulas incompatible with the proposed reading of <span>\\\\(\\\\Box \\\\)</span>.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-024-00220-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-024-00220-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The cut-free validity theory \(\textsf{STV}\) proposed by Barrio, Rosenblatt, and Tajer suffers from incompleteness with respect to its object language validity predicate. The validity predicate of \(\textsf{STV}\) fails in validating some valid inferences of its underlying logic, the Strict Tolerant logic \(\textsf{ST}\). In this paper, we will present the non-normal modal logic \(\textsf{ST}^{\Box \Diamond }\) whose modalities \(\Box \) and \(\Diamond \) capture the tautologies/valid inferences and the consistent formulas of the logic \(\textsf{ST}\), respectively. We show that \(\textsf{ST}^{\Box \Diamond }\) does not trivialize when extended with self-referential devices. We also show that such a solution poses a dilemma. If we extend \(\textsf{ST}^{\Box \Diamond }\) in such a way that it allows iterated modal formulas among its theorems, then the resulting interpretation of \(\Box \) as validity implies that metametainferences of \(\textsf{ST}\) behave like classical logic. On the other hand, if we allow these modalities to receive intermediate truth values, we obtain formulas incompatible with the proposed reading of \(\Box \).