Abstract
It has been said that modal logic consists of three main disciplines: duality theory, completeness theory and correspondence theory; and that they are the pillars on which this edifice called modal logic rests. This seems to be true if one looks at the history of modal logic, for all three disciplines have been explicitly defined around the same time, namely in the mid-seventies. While it is certainly true that modal logic can be divided in this way, such a division creates the danger that the subareas are developed merely in their own right, disregarding the obvious connections between them. Moreover, such historically grown divisions always run a risk of enshrining certain errors that have accidentally been made and subsequently hindered the development. One such error is the idea that Kripke-frames are the natural or fundamental semantics for modal logic. Although I agree that Kripke-models are the most intuitive models and that they are in many cases indeed the intended models, I cannot go along with the claim that they are in any stronger sense fundamental. Philosophically as well as mathematically, to start with Kripke-frames is to start at the wrong end; philosophically, because nothing warrants the belief that possible worlds exist — in fact, for my ears this is a contradictio in adiectu — and indeed it is much more plausible to say that possible worlds are philosophical fiction. And mathematically, because Kripke-frames are deficient in some respects and these deficiencies do not apply to modal algebras and also because the former can be obtained canonically from the latter. It is surprising how long it was possible to ignore Stone’s representation theory for boolean algebras and also Tarski’s work together with Jónsson in which Kripke-semantics appeared long before Kripke himself came to discover it.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
van Benthem, J. F. A. K.: Some kinds of modal completeness, Studia Logica 39:125–141, 1980.
van Benthem, J. F. A. K.: Modal and Classical Logic, Bibliopolis, 1983.
van Benthem, J. F. A. K.: Correspondence Theory, in: D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.): Handbook of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 2, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1986.
Benthem, J. F. A. K.: Notes on Modal Definability, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 39: 20–39, 1989.
Chagrova, L. A.: Undecidable Problems in Correspondency Theory, Journal of Symbolic Logic 56: 1261–1272, 1991.
Fine, K.: Logics containing K4, Part I, Journal of Symbolic Logic 39: 229–237, 1974.
Fine, K.: Some connections between elementary and modal logic, in [14].
Fine, K.: Logics containing K4, Part II, Journal of Symbolic Logic 50: 619–651, 1985.
Goldblatt, R. I.: Metamathematics of modal logic, Reports on Mathematical Logic 6:41–78, 1976 (Part 1), 7: 21–57 (Part 2), 1976.
Goldblatt, R. I.: Varieties of Complex Algebras, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 38: 173–241, 1989.
Goldblatt, R. I.: The McKinsey Axiom Is Not Canonical, Journal of Symbolic Logic 56: 554–562, 1991.
G. E. Hughes, M. J. Creswell: A Companion to Modal Logic, Methuen, London and New York, 1984.
Jónsson, B., Tarski, A.: Boolean algebras with operators, Am. Journ. of Math. 73: 891–939, 1951.
Kanger, S.: Proceedings of the Third Scandinavian Logic Symposium, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975.
Kracht, M.: Internal Definability and Completeness in Modal Logic, Dissertation, FU Berlin, 1991.
Rautenberg, W.: Klassische and nichtklassische Aussagenlogik, Vieweg Verlag, Wiesbaden, 1979.
Sahlqvist, H.: First and Second order semantics for modal logic, in [14].
Sambin, G., Vaccaro, V.: Topology and duality in modal logic, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 37: 249–296, 1988.
Sambin, G., Vaccaro, V.: A topological proof of Sahlqvist’s theorem, Journal of Symbolic Logic 54: 992–999, 1989.
Zakharyashchev, M.: Canonical Formulas for K4, Part I: Basic Results, to appear.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1993 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kracht, M. (1993). How Completeness and Correspondence Theory Got Married. In: de Rijke, M. (eds) Diamonds and Defaults. Synthese Library, vol 229. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8242-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8242-1_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4286-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8242-1
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive