arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1312.7832math.LOcs.AIcs.CLcs.LO
收藏

定义经典逻辑的蕴含关系

Defining implication relation for classical logic

School of Software, Chongqing University(软件学院,重庆大学)

Li Fu

AI总结:

本文指出了经典逻辑中“蕴含”与“析取”等价关系存在的问题,提出了一种移除不正确“析取到蕴含”规则的逻辑系统IRL,该系统在保留经典逻辑基本定律的同时确保了该规则不可推导。

摘要:

在经典逻辑中,“P蕴含Q”等价于“非P或Q”。众所周知,这种等价关系存在问题。实际上,从“P蕴含Q”可以推导出“非P或Q”(“蕴含到析取”是有效的),而从“非P或Q”通常无法推导出“P蕴含Q”(“析取到蕴含”并非普遍有效),因此它们之间的等价关系通常无效。本研究旨在从经典逻辑(CL)中移除不正确的“析取到蕴含”。本文提出的逻辑系统(逻辑IRL)具有以下预期特性:(a) 将“析取到蕴含”加入IRL即可得到CL,(b) “析取到蕴含”在IRL中不可推导;同时(c) 经典逻辑的基本定律,包括排中律(LEM)与双重否定律、不矛盾律(LNC)与爆炸原理(ECQ)、合取消去与析取引入,以及假言三段论与析取三段论,在IRL中均得以保留。

英文摘要:

In classical logic, "P implies Q" is equivalent to "not-P or Q". It is well known that the equivalence is problematic. Actually, from "P implies Q", "not-P or Q" can be inferred ("Implication-to-Disjunction" is valid), whereas from "not-P or Q", "P implies Q" cannot be inferred in general ("Disjunction-to-Implication" is not generally valid), so the equivalence between them is invalid in general. This work aims to remove the incorrect Disjunction-to-Implication from classical logic (CL). The logical system (the logic IRL) this paper proposes has the expected properties: (a) CL is obtained by adding Disjunction-to-Implication to IRL, and (b) Disjunction-to-Implication is not derivable in IRL; while (c) fundamental laws in classical logic, including law of excluded middle (LEM) and principle of double negation, law of non-contradiction (LNC) and ex contradictione quodlibet (ECQ), conjunction elimination and disjunction introduction, and hypothetical syllogism and disjunctive syllogism, are all retained in IRL.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑