Intuitionistic tense and modal logic

Abstract

In this article we shall construct intuitionistic analogues to the main systems of classical tense logic. Since each classical modal logic can be gotten from some tense logic by one of the definitions(i) □ p ≡ p ∧ Gp ∧ Hp, ◇p ≡ p ∨ Fp ∨ Pp; or,(ii) □ p ≡ p ∧ Gp, ◇p = p ∨ Fp(see [5]), we shall find that our intuitionistic tense logics give us analogues to the classical modal logics as well.We shall not here discuss the philosophical issues raised by our logics. Readers interested in the intuitionistic view of time and modality should see [2] for a detailed discussion.In §2 we define the Kripke models for IKt, the intuitionistic analogue to Lemmon's system Kt. We then prove the completeness and decidability of this system (§§3–5). Finally, we extend our results to other sorts of tense logic and to modal logic.In the language of IKt, we have: sentence-letters p, q, r, etc.; the (intuitionistic) connectives ∧, ∨, →, ¬; and unary operators P (“it was the case”), F (it will be the case”), H (“it has always been the case”) and G (“it will always be the case”). Formulas are defined inductively: all sentence-letters are formulas; if X is a formula, so are ¬X, PX, FX, HX, and GX; if X and Y are formulas, so are X ∧ Y, X ∨ Y, and X → Y. We shall see that, in contrast to classical tense logic, F and P cannot be defined in terms of G and H.