Author:
French Rohan,Humberstone Lloyd
Abstract
It is well known that no consistent normal modal logic contains (as theorems) both ◊A and ◊¬A (for any formula A). Here we observe that this claim can be strengthened to the following: for any formula A, either no consistent normal modal logic contains ◊A, or else no consistent normal modal logic contains ◊¬A.
Publisher
Uniwersytet Lodzki (University of Lodz)
Reference15 articles.
1. Anderson A. R., The Formal Analysis of Normative Systems, [in:] N. Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, PA 1967, pp. 147–213.
2. Benthem Johan van, Modal Logic and Classical Logic, Bibliopolis, Naples 1985.
3. Blok W. J. and Ko¨hler P., Algebraic Semantics for Quasi-Classical Modal Logics, Journal of Symbolic Logic 48 (1983), pp. 941–964.
4. Fagin R., Halpern J. Y., and Vardi M. Y., What is an Inference Rule?, Journal of Symbolic Logic 57 (1992), pp. 1018–1045.
5. French Rohan, Denumerably Many Post-complete Normal Modal Logics with Propositional Constants, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 53 (2012), pp. 549–556.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. About the Unification Types of Modal Logics;Outstanding Contributions to Logic;2024