Bridging the two plans in the semantics for relevant logic
From MaRDI portal
Recommendations
Cites work
- 40 years of FDE: an introductory overview
- ``Four-valued semantics for the relevant logic R
- A comparative study of various model-theoretic treatments of negation: A history of formal negation
- An introduction to non-classical logic. From if to is
- Handbook of philosophical logic. Vol. 6
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4016857 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3659568 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 972605 (Why is no real title available?)
- Intuitive semantics for first-degree entailments and `coupled trees'
- Logic as based on incompatibility
- Logic reduced to bare (proof-theoretical) bones
- Negation in relevant logics. (How I stopped worrying and learned to love the Routley star)
- On when a semantics is not a semantics: some reasons for disliking the Routley-Meyer semantics for relevance logic
- Power matrices and Dunn-Belnap semantics: reflections on a remark of Graham Priest
- Substructural negations
- The American plan completed: Alternative classical-style semantics, without stars, for relevant and paraconsistent logics
- The semantics of entailment. II
- The Semantics of First Degree Entailment
- There is more to negation than modality
- Understanding negation implicationally in the relevant logic R
Cited in
(6)- The American plan completed: Alternative classical-style semantics, without stars, for relevant and paraconsistent logics
- Negation on the Australian plan
- Truth, falsehood, information and beyond: the American plan generalized
- Two negations are more than one
- Troubles with the Canberra plan
- Multiset-multiset frames
This page was built for publication: Bridging the two plans in the semantics for relevant logic
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q3305616)