Situations in which disjunctive syllogism can lead from true premises to a false conclusion

DOI10.1305/NDJFL/1039700746MaRDI QIDQ1130236zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors S. V. Bhave

Publication date 8 November 1998

Published in Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://doi.org/10.1305/ndjfl/1039700746

zbMATH Keywords

disjunctive syllogismfuture contingentsrelevance logic

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Philosophical and critical aspects of logic and foundations (03A05) Substructural logics (including relevance, entailment, linear logic, Lambek calculus, BCK and BCI logics) (03B47)

Review text

Relevance logicians have attacked the validity of disjunctive syllogism \((p\vee q, \sim p, \therefore q)\) where the disjunction is merely extensional (i.e. does not support \(\ulcorner\) If it were the case that \(p\), then it would be the case that \(q\urcorner\)). Geach, in his review (Philosophy 52, 495 (1977)) of \textit{A. R. Anderson} and \textit{N. D. Belnap}, Entailment. The logic of relevance and necessity, Vol. 1 (1975; Zbl 0323.02030), pointed out that counterexamples to extensional disjunctive syllogism were not forthcoming. Considering (1) \(\ulcorner p\) is most probably false\(\urcorner\), the author argues that (2) \(\ulcorner p\) is not most probably false\(\urcorner\) is the negation of (1) but not the contradictory of (1), because ``not most probably false means the disjunction of all possible truth values of \(p\) with the exception of ``most probably false. If ``There will be a naval battle tomorrow is either most probable, or probable to some degree (other than 0 or 1), then we can use this fact to construct a disjunctive syllogism of the form \(\ulcorner\)(2), (1) or \(q\), so \(q\urcorner\) where \(\ulcorner q\urcorner\) can only be either true or false and is in fact false; this syllogism will have true premises and a false conclusion.

Recommendations

• The Gentzenization and decidability of RW
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3926879
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 596497
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 4012563
• Inconsistency Tolerance
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3954874
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1749142
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 48206
• Intuitive semantics for first-degree entailment and `coupled trees'
• Relevant implication

Cites work

• Burgess on relevance: A fallacy indeed
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3504935 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1734464 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3057869 (Why is no real title available?)
• Logic on the Australian plan
• On Entailment
• Relevance and disjunctive syllogism
• Reply to Burgess and to Read
• Whither relevant arithmetic?

Cited in

(2)

• Reply to Burgess and to Read
• A plea for KR

This page was built for publication: Situations in which disjunctive syllogism can lead from true premises to a false conclusion

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1130236)