Negation by iteration
The question we shall be considering is whether the operation of negation \((\neg)\) can be construed as the result of iterating some (other) singulary operation, to be written as \(\S\), in the sense that for every formula (or sentence) \(A\), \(\neg A\) is equivalent to \(\S \S A\). So put, the question is vague in several respects. To be more precise, we take as given some consequence relation \(\vdash_0\) on a language with \(\neg\) as a singulary connective, with \(\neg\) behaving in some such way as to deserve the name of negation -- for example, \(\vdash_0\) might be the consequence relation associated with intuitionistic logic, or that associated with classical logic -- and the problem is: to introduce another singulary connective, \S, and extend \(\vdash_0\) to a consequence relation \(\vdash\) on the expanded language with, for all formulas \(A\) of that language: \[ \neg A\dashv \vdash \S\S A.\tag{1} \] Further, to exclude treating `\S\S' as an unstructed block rather than as the iteration of a connective which responds to the content of what it attaches to, we require that \(\S\) be congruential, in the sense that for all formulas \(A,B\), we have \[ A\dashv \vdash B\text{ implies }\S A\dashv \vdash\S B. \tag{2} \] Finally, we want the extension from \(\vdash_0\) to \(\vdash\) to be conservative, in the sense that for any set \(\Gamma\cup \{A\}\) of \(\S\)-free formulas, we have \(\Gamma \vdash A\) only when \(\Gamma \vdash_0A\). Following \textit{N. D. Belnap} [``Tonk, plonk and plink, Analysis 22, 130-134 (1962)], we take this to be a necessary condition for any adherent of the original logic \(\vdash_0\) to agree that there really does exist a connective such as \(\S\), giving rise to negation by iteration à la (1). In the further interests of simplicity we shall from now on address this existence question when \(\vdash_0\) is taken as the consequence relation of classical sentential logic, or some \(\neg\)-including fragment thereof.
- Singulary extensional connectives: A closer look
- Periodicity of negation
- An invitation to new essays on Belnap-Dunn logic
- Bilattice logics and demi-negation
- The geometry of negation
- Classical negation can be expressed by one of its halves
- Simulating without Negation
- On contra-classical variants of Nelson logic \textbf{N4} and its classical extension
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 870913 (Why is no real title available?)
- Questions to Michael Dunn
- A note on Ciuciura's \(\mathbf{mbC}^1\)
- Bisequent calculus for four-valued quasi-relevant logics: cut elimination and interpolation
- Double negation as minimal negation
- Basic Four-Valued Systems of Cyclic Negations
- Cyclic negations and four-valuedness
- Dunn semantics for contra-classical logics
- A note on Grigoriev and Zaitsev's system \(\mathrm{CNL}^2_4\)
This page was built for publication: Negation by iteration
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q4365783)
