Another plan for negation

Francez, Nissim

doi:10.26686/ajl.v16i5.5190

Cited by 2 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Primitive compatibility relations are modeled by way of an accessibility relation between information-containing "states" (which one can hear as 1 It's worth noting from the outset that, though the Australian Plan is the most prominent incompatibility-based account of negation and so the one on which I will focus here, it's not the only such account. See also Francez (2019) and Brandom (2008Brandom ( , 2018. As far as I'm aware, all such accounts presuppose the symmetry of incompatibility, and so the argument developed here can be straightforwardly carried over to any such account.…”

Section: The Incompatibility-based Account Of Negationmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Really, two, three, or any number of people are siblings just in case they have the same parents. 16 The property of having the same parents, in terms of which the relation of siblinghood is defined, is a property that applies to pluralities of people. For any number of people who all have the same parents, they are all siblings.…”

Section: Two Attempts At An Answermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why Must Incompatibility Be Symmetric?

Simonelli

2023

The Philosophical Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why must incompatibility be symmetric? An odd question, but recent work in the semantics of non-classical logic, which appeals to the notion of incompatibility as a primitive and defines negation in terms of it, has brought this question to the fore. Francesco Berto proposes such a semantics for negation argues that, since incompatibility must be symmetric, double negation introduction must be a law of negation. However, he offers no argument for the claim that incompatibility really must be symmetric. Here, I provide such an argument, showing that, insofar as we think of incompatibility in normative pragmatic terms, it can play its basic pragmatic function only if it is symmetric. The upshot is that we can vindicate Berto’s claim about the symmetry of incompatibility but only if we, pace Berto, think about incompatibility, in the first instance, as a pragmatic relation between acts rather than a semantic relation between contents.

show abstract

Section: The Incompatibility-based Account Of Negationmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Two Attempts At An Answermentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Must Incompatibility Be Symmetric?

Simonelli

2023

The Philosophical Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Francez's logics (see [10]; see also [11] and [12]) have been the only recognized nexive logics so far. But M3V is nexive too, as a consequence of all negated conditionals being true.…”

Section: Mortensen's Three-valued Connexive Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But such a connective is not definable in M3V: The connective is not definable in CN as per [30], and a connective is definable in M3V iff it is definable in CN, as per [32]. 11 The list of properties above does not highlight enough some features of cCSL3, especially around connexive principles:…”

Section: Connexive Closed Set Logicmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mortensen Logics

Estrada-González

Cano-Jorge

2022

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In [23], Mortensen introduced a connexive logic commonly known as 'M3V'. M3V is obtained by adding a special conditional to LP. Among its most notable features, besides its being connexive, M3V is negation-inconsistent and it validates the negation of every conditional. But Mortensen has also studied and applied extensively other non-connexive logics, for example, closed set logic, CSL, and a variant of Sette's logic, identified and called 'P 2 ' by Marcos in [17].In this paper, we analyze and compare systematically the connexive variants of CSL and P 2 , obtained by adding the M3V conditional to them. Our main observations are two. First, that the inconsistency of M3V is exacerbated in the connexive variant of closed set logic, while it is attenuated in the connexive variant of the Sette-like P 2 . Second, that the M3V conditional is, unlike other conditionals, connexively stable, meaning that it remains connexive when combined with the main paraconsistent negations. * This paper was written during the COVID-19 crisis. The authors want to thank the reviewers for their precious comments, as well as the support from the PAPIIT project IG400422 and from the Notre Dame International-Mexico Faculty Grant Program project "The scope and limits of non-detachable conditionals". The first author also wants to acknowledge the support from the DGAPA-UNAM through a PASPA sabbatical grant and from the Coimbra Group and the KU Leuven through a scholarship from the Programme for Young Professors and Researchers from Latin American Universities.

show abstract

Another plan for negation

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

Why Must Incompatibility Be Symmetric?

Why Must Incompatibility Be Symmetric?

Mortensen Logics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About