Tuesday, December 2, 2008 at 10:27PM
It’s good to get back into writing. Here’s a paper ”Truth Values and Proof Theory” that I’ve been thinking about for a long time. I presented a research seminar on this material last year – it’s taken me this long to write it up, due to other commitments.
Here’s the abstract:
In this paper I present an account of truth values for classical logic, intuitionistic logic, and the modal logic S5, in which truth values are not a fundamental category from which the logic is defined, but rather, feature as an idealisation of more fundamental logical features arising out of the proof theory for each system. The result is not a new set of semantic structures, but a new understanding of how the existing semantic structures may be understood in terms of a more fundamental notion of logical consequence.
I like these results, as they’re a mix of motivating philosophy, and formal proofs. I think I’m getting a better understanding of the relationship between the [Cut] rule in a sequent calculus and the maximality conditions involved in the behaviour of things like two-valued evaluations, possible worlds and points in model structures for other sorts of logics. It’s not a coincidence that sequents have two sides, and that there are two truth values. I don’t think I’ve plumbed the depth of the connections between proof theory and model theory, but at the very least in writing this paper up I’ve got a better idea of some of the interesting questions around this area.
It’s one of those ‘bonus’ results that I’ve got out of this research a uniform way of proving completeness for classical logic, Kripke and Beth models for intuitionistic logic, and universal models for S5, all with exactly the same sort of structure. That was a surprise to me when I saw those results just fall out.
Comments on the paper, of course, are welcome. Don’t comment on it here, but on the paper page.
Now I’ve got to figure out how to massage these results into the book. (It’s a pity my backlog of other writing-up tasks is so long, but that seems to be the natural state of the academic these days.)
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | Sorry... – We're in the news... – Informal Logic: now open access – Logical Pluralism, in Tartu – Random interesting fact (one in an intermittent series) – Pain, stress, redundancies, another day at the office – Bag packed, let's go! – Amsterdam! – Tartu – Tartu Pluralism Day #1 – Tartu Pluralism Day #2 – Tartu Pluralism Days #3 and #4 – Off to Guangzhou – Back! Then off, then back again! – New Paper: Truth Values and Proof Theory – New Paper: Assertion, Denial and Non-Classical Theories – Always More... – Merry Christmas, all – 2009 |
This is a news item at consequently.org. There are many others at the archive page. You can add comments at the end.
I’m Greg Restall, and this is my website. I work in Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. Email: greg at consequently.org; Post: School of of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3010, Australia.
Start at the home page—a summary of the site. The left column is news, archived on the news archive page. The central column is for photos, archived on the occasional photos page. The right column contains recent items from the writing page, which lists my publications. These are also categorised by topic. You can follow my links at my account on delicious and occasional short snarky remarks at @consequently on twitter.
To subscribe to this site, either read the full feed
of everything, the feed of news items only
, or the feed of writing items only
, which is also great for podcasting pdfs automatically.
This site is handcoded: I write text in Textmate, and Webby files things in the right place and uploads them to the server. This page was last modified on 2009-01-07 at 10:06PM.
The pawn and the king end up in the same box when the game is over.
— an Italian proverb.