Skip to main content
Log in

Inverse Images of Box Formulas in Modal Logic

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We investigate, for several modal logics but concentrating on KT, KD45, S4 and S5, the set of formulas B for which \({\square B}\) is provably equivalent to \({\square A}\) for a selected formula A (such as p, a sentence letter). In the exceptional case in which a modal logic is closed under the (‘cancellation’) rule taking us from \({\square C \leftrightarrow \square D}\) to \({C \leftrightarrow D}\), there is only one formula B, to within equivalence, in this inverse image, as we shall call it, of \({\square A}\) (relative to the logic concerned); for logics for which the intended reading of “\({\square}\) ” is epistemic or doxastic, failure to be closed under this rule indicates that from the proposition expressed by a knowledge- or belief-attribution, the propositional object of the attitude in question cannot be recovered: arguably, a somewhat disconcerting situation. More generally, the inverse image of \({\square A}\) may comprise a range of non-equivalent formulas, all those provably implied by one fixed formula and provably implying another—though we shall see that for several choices of logic and of the formula A, there is not even such an ‘interval characterization’ of the inverse image (of \({\square A}\)) to be found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balbiani, P., I. Shapirovsky, and V. Shehtman, Every world can see a Sahlqvist world, in G. Governatori, I. Hodkinson and Y. Venema (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic, Volume 6, College Publications, London, 2006, pp. 69–85.

  2. van Benthem J., Humberstone L.: Halldén-completeness by gluing of Kripke frames, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 24, 426–430 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Castañeda H.-N.: “He”: a study in the logic of self-consciousness, Ratio 8, 130–157 (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chellas B.F.: Modal Logic: An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1980)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Fagin, R., J. Y. Halpern, Y. Moses, and M. Y. Vardi, Reasoning About Knowledge, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 1995. Paperback edition, revised: 2003.

  6. Fitch F.B.: A logical analysis of some value concepts, Journal of Symbolic Logic 28, 135–142 (1963)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Geach, P. T., Reference and Generality, Emended edition, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1968. First edition 1962.

  8. Green, M., Williams, J.N. (eds.), Moore’s Paradox: New Essays on Belief, Rationality, and the First Person, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Halbach V.: On a side effect of solving Fitch’s paradox by typing knowledge, Analysis 68, 114–120 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Halpern J.Y.: Should knowledge entail belief?, Journal of Philosophical Logic 25, 483–494 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hazen, A. P., The myth of the intuitionistic “Or”, in J. M. Dunn and A. Gupta (eds.), Truth or Consequences: Essays in Honor of Nuel Belnap, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1990, pp. 177–195.

  12. Hintikka J.: Knowledge and Belief: An Introduction to the Logic of the Two Notions, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Holliday, W. H., and T. F. Icard, Moorean phenomena in epistemic logic, in L. Beklemishev, V. Goranko and V. Shehtman (eds.), Advances in Modal Logic, Volume 8, College Books, London, 2010, pp. 178–199.

  14. Howe R.B.K.: The cognitive nature of desire, Southern Journal of Philosophy 32, 179–196 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Humberstone L.: Wanting as believing, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 17, 49–62 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Humberstone L.: What Fa says about a, Dialectica 54, 1–28 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Humberstone L.: The modal logic of agreement and noncontingency, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 43, 95–127 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Humberstone, L., Modal formulas true at some point in every model, Australasian Journal of Logic 6:70–82, 2008. http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/ajl/2008.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Humberstone L.: Collapsing modalities, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 50, 119–132 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Humberstone L.: The Connectives, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Humberstone, L., Replacement in logic, Journal of Philosophical Logic (in press).

  22. Humberstone L., Williamson T.: Inverses for normal modal operators, Studia Logica 59, 33–64 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kracht M.: The Mathematics of Language, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin (2003)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. von Kutschera F.: Global supervenience and belief, Journal of Philosophical Logic 23, 103–110 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lemmon, E. J., and D. S. Scott, in K. Segerberg (ed.), An Introduction to Modal Logic, American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1977. Originally circulated 1966.

  26. Linsky, B., Logical Types in Some Arguments About Knowability and Belief, pp.163–179 in Salerno [29].

  27. Lucas J.R.: Mathematical tennis, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 85, 63–72 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Peacocke, C., Causal modalities and realism, in M. Platts (ed.), Reference, Truth and Reality, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1980, pp. 41–68.

  29. Salerno, J. (ed.), New Essays on the Knowability Paradox, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Salerno, J. Knowability Noir: 1945–1963, pp. 29–48 in [29].

  31. Segerberg K.: Classical Propositional Operators, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Shvarts, G. F., Gentzen Style Theorems for K45 and K45D, in A. R. Maier and M. A. Taitslin (eds.), Logic at Botik ’89, LNCS #363, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989, pp. 245–256.

  33. Slaney, J., KD45 is Not a Doxastic Logic, Technical Report TR-SRS-3-96, Automated Reasoning Project, RSISE, Australian National University, Canberra, 1996.

  34. Smiley T.J.: Relative necessity, Journal of Symbolic Logic 28, 113–134 (1963)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Smoryński C.: Self-Reference and Modal Logic, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1985)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. Sorensen R.: Blindspots, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Sorensen, R., Epistemic paradoxes, in E. N. Zalta (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2012 edition). 〈http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/epistemic-paradoxes/〉.

  38. Stalnaker, R. C., The problem of logical omniscience I, II, Chapters 13 and 14 of Stalnaker, Context and Content: Essays on Intentionality in Speech and Thought, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999.

  39. Williamson T.: Continuum many maximal consistent normal bimodal logics with inverses, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 39, 1128–1134 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Williamson T.: Two incomplete anti-realist modal epistemic logics, Journal of Symbolic Logic 55, 297–314 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Williamson T.: Knowledge and Its Limits, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wolter F.: A counterexample in tense logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37, 167–173 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Zolin E. E., (2000) Embeddings of propositional monomodal logics. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 8:861–882

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lloyd Humberstone.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Humberstone, L. Inverse Images of Box Formulas in Modal Logic. Stud Logica 101, 1031–1060 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-012-9419-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-012-9419-6

Keywords

Navigation