Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T14:22:18.762Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Universal Character of the Primitive Logic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2016

Katuzi Ono
Katuzi Ono*
Affiliation:
Mathematical Institute, Nagoya University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The PRIMITIVE LOGIC LO introduced in my former work is a logic having only two logical constants IMPLICATION → and UNIVERSAL QUANTIFICATION ( ) with their usual inference rules which are admitted even in the INTUITIONISTIC PREDICATE LOGIC LJ. LO is really a very simple logic, maybe the simplest possible logic as one can imagine, but it is very important because of its universal character. In fact, popular logics such as the LOWER CLASSICAL PREDICATE LOGIC LK, the INTUITIONISTIC PREDICATE LOGIC LJ, the MINIMAL PREDICATE .LOGIC LM, etc. can be faithfully interpreted in it. Speaking frankly, I am further expecting that all the important logics would be interpreted faithfully in it and would disclose their intrinsic characteristics by being interpreted in it. Main purpose of this paper is to show the universal character of the primitive logic LO by pointing out that a series of typical logics are faithfully interpretable in LO.

Type
Research Article
Information
Nagoya Mathematical Journal , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 1966 , pp. 331 - 353
Copyright
Copyright © Editorial Board of Nagoya Mathematical Journal 1966

References

[1] Curry, H. B., [1] The system LD, J. Symb. Log., 17 (1952), 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Foundations of mathematical logic (1963). [2] Gentzen, G., [1] Untersuchungen iiber das logische Schliessen, Math. Ztschr., 39 (1934) 176–210, 405–431.Google Scholar
[3] Glivenko, V., [1] Sur quelques points de la logique de M. Brouwer, Bull. Acad. Sci. Belg. (1929), 183–188.Google Scholar
[4] Hilbert, D. and Bernays, P., [1] Grundlagen der Mathematik, I (1934).Google Scholar
[5] Johansson, I., [1] Der Minimalkalkül, ein reduzierter intuitionistischer Formalismus, Compositio Math., 4 (1936), 119–136.Google Scholar
[6] Kuroda, S., [1] Intuitionistische Untersuchungen der formalistischen Logik, Nagoya Math. J., 2 (1951), 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Lorenzen, P., [1] Einfiihrung in die operative Logik und Mathematik (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Ono, K., [1] A certain kind of formal theories, Nagoya Math J., 25 (1965), 59–86. [2] Logische Untersuchungen iiber die Grundlagen der Mathematik, J. of Fac. of Sci., Imp. Univ. of Tokyo, Sect. 1, vol. Ill, part 7 (1938), 329–389. [3] On a practical way of describing formal deductions, Nagoya Math. J., 20 (1962), 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Peirce, C. S., [1] On the algebra of logic; A contribution to the philosophy of notation., Amer. J. of Math., 7 (1885), 180–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar