Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Validity Concepts in Proof-theoretic Semantics

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The standard approach to what I call “proof-theoretic semantics”, which is mainly due to Dummett and Prawitz, attempts to give a semantics of proofs by defining what counts as a valid proof. After a discussion of the general aims of proof-theoretic semantics, this paper investigates in detail various notions of proof-theoretic validity and offers certain improvements of the definitions given by Prawitz. Particular emphasis is placed on the relationship between semantic validity concepts and validity concepts used in normalization theory. It is argued that these two sorts of concepts must be kept strictly apart.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • S. Blamey (2002) ‘Partial Logic’ D. Gabbay F. Guenthner (Eds) Handbook of Philosophical Logic EditionNumber2 NumberInSeriesVolume 5. Kluwer Dordrecht 261–353

    Google Scholar 

  • R.B. Brandom (2000) Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism University Press Cambridge Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M.: 1975, ‘The Philosophical Basis of Intuitionistic Logic’, in H. E. Rose and J. C. Shepherdson (eds.), Logic Colloquium ’73, North Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 5–40, repr. in M. Dummett, Truth and Other Enigmas, Duckworth, London 1978, pp. 215–247.

  • M. Dummett (1991) The Logical Basis of Metaphysics Duckworth London

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Etchemendy (1990) The Concept of Logical Consequence Harvard University Press Cambridge Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Gentzen, G.: 1934, ‘Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen’, Mathematische Zeitschrift 39 (1934/35), 176–210, 405–431, English translation (‘Investigations into Logical Deduction’) in M. E. Szabo (ed), The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen, North Holland, Amsterdam 1969, pp. 68–131. Quotations are according to Szabo’s translation.

  • J.-Y. Girard (1971) ‘Une extension de l’interprétation de Gödel à l’analyse, et son application à l’élimination des coupures dans l’analyse et la théorie des types’ J. E. Fenstad (Eds) Proceedings of the 2nd Scandinavian Logic Symposium (Oslo 1970) North Holland Amsterdam 63–92

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Hallnäs (1991) ArticleTitle‘Partial Inductive Definitions’ Theoretical Computer Science. 87 115–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallnäs, L.: 2006, ‘On the Proof-Theoretic Foundation of General Definition Theory’, Synthese (this issue).

  • L. Hallnäs P. Schroeder-Heister (1990) ArticleTitle‘A Proof-Theoretic Approach to Logic Programming. I. Clauses as Rules’ Journal of Logic and Computation. 1 IssueID1990/91 261–283

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Hallnäs P. Schroeder-Heister (1991) ArticleTitle‘A Proof-Theoretic Approach to Logic Programming. II. Programs as Definitions’ Journal of Logic and Computation. 1 IssueID1990/91 635–660

    Google Scholar 

  • F. Joachimski R. Matthes (2003) ArticleTitle‘Short Proofs of Normalization for the Simply-Typed λ-calculus, Permutative Conversions and Gödels T’ Archive for Mathematical Logic. 42 59–87 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s00153-002-0156-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahle, R. and P. Schroeder-Heister: 2006, ‘Introduction: Proof-Theoretic Semantics’, Synthese (this issue).

  • P. Lorenzen (1955) Einführung in die operative Logik und Mathematik EditionNumber2 Springer Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Martin-Löf (1971) ‘Hauptsatz for the Intuitionistic Theory of Iterated Inductive Definitions’ J. E. Fenstad (Eds) Proceedings of the 2nd Scandinavian Logic Symposium (Oslo 1970) North Holland Amsterdam 179–216

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Martin-Löf (1995) ‘Verificationism Then and Now’ W. DePauli-Schimanovich (Eds) et al. The Foundational Debate: Complexity and Constructivity in Mathematics and Physics Kluwer Dordrecht 187–196

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Martin-Löf (1998) ‘Truth and Knowability: On the Principles C and K of Michael Dummett’ H. G. Dales G. Oliveri (Eds) Truth in Mathematics Clarendon Press Oxford 105–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, R.: 1970, ‘English as a Formal Language’, in B. Visentini et al. (eds.), Linguaggi nella società e nella tecnica, Milano. Repr. in R. H. Thomason (ed.), Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague, Yale University Press, New Haven 1974, pp. 188–221.

  • R. A. Muskens J. Benthem Particlevan A. Visser (1997) ‘Dynamics’ J. Benthem Particlevan A. ter Meulen (Eds) Handbook of Logic and Language Elsevier Amsterdam 587–648

    Google Scholar 

  • Negri, S. and J. von Plato: 2001, Structural Proof Theory, Cambridge University Press.

  • D. Prawitz (1965) Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study Almqvist & Wiksell Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Prawitz (1971) ‘Ideas and Results in Proof Theory’ J. E. Fenstad (Eds) Proceedings of the 2nd Scandinavian Logic Symposium (Oslo 1970) North Holland Amsterdam 235–308

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Prawitz (1973) ‘Towards a Foundation of a General Proof Theory’ P. Suppes (Eds) et al. Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science IV North Holland Amsterdam 225–250

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Prawitz (1974) ArticleTitle‘On the Idea of a General Proof Theory’ Synthese. 27 63–77 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00660889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D. Prawitz (1985) ArticleTitle‘Remarks on Some Approaches to the Concept of Logical Consequence’ Synthese. 62 152–171 Occurrence Handle10.1007/BF00486044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prawitz, D.: 2006, ‘Meaning Approached Via Proofs’, Synthese (this issue).

  • P. Schroeder-Heister (1984a) ArticleTitle‘A Natural Extension of Natural Deduction’ Journal of Symbolic Logic. 49 1284–1300 Occurrence Handle10.2307/2274279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1984b, ‘Generalized Rules for Quantifiers and the Completeness of the Intuitionistic Operators &, ∨, ⊃, ⋏, ∀, ∃’, in M.M. Richter et al., Computation and Proof Theory. Proceedings of the Logic Colloquium held in Aachen, July 1983, Part II. Springer, Berlin, LNM, Vol. 1104, pp. 399–426.

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1991a, ‘Hypothetical Reasoning and Definitional Reflection in Logic Programming’, in P. Schroeder-Heister (ed.), Extensions of Logic Programming. International Workshop, Tübingen, December 1989, Proceedings. Springer, Berlin, LNCS, Vol. 475, pp. 327–340.

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1991b, ‘Structural Frameworks, Substructural Logics, and the Role of Elimination Inferences’, in G. Huet and G. Plotkin (eds.), Logical Frameworks. Cambridge University Press, pp. 385–403.

  • P. Schroeder-Heister (1991) ArticleTitle‘Uniform Proof-Theoretic Semantics for Logical Constants. Abstract.’ Journal of Symbolic Logic. 56 1142

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1992, ‘Cut-Elimination in Logics with Definitional Reflection’, in D. Pearce and H. Wansing (eds.), Nonclassical Logics and Information International Workshop, Berlin 1990, Proceedings. Springer, Berlin, LNCS, Vol. 619, pp. 146–171.

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1993, ‘Rules of Definitional Reflection’, in 8th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (Montreal 1993). IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp. 222–232.

  • Schroeder-Heister, P.: 1994b, ‘Definitional Reflection and the Completion’, in (ed.), Extensions of Logic Programming. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop, ELP ’93, St. Andrews, March/April 1993, Springer, Berlin, LNCS, Vol. 798, pp. 333–347.

  • W. W. Tait (1967) ArticleTitle‘Intensional Interpretations of Functionals of Finite Type I’ Journal of Symbolic Logic. 32 198–212 Occurrence Handle10.2307/2271658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tait W.W. (2006) ‘Proof-Theoretic Semantics for Classical Mathematics’, Synthese (this issue).

  • Tarski A.: 1933, ‘Der Wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten Sprachen’, Studia Philosophica 1 (1935), 261–405 (translated from the Polish original of 1933, with a postscript). Reprinted in K. Berka and L. Kreiser (eds.), Logik-Texte, Berlin 1971. English translation of the German version in A. Tarski, Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956.

  • Tennant, N. W.: 1978, Natural Logic, Edinburgh University Press.

  • N.W. Tennant (1987) Anti-Realism and Logic Clarendon Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • N.W. Tennant (1997) The Taming of the True Clarendon Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Troelstra, A. S. and H. Schwichtenberg: 1996, Basic Proof Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2nd edn. 2000.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut, Universität Tübingen, Sand 13, 72076, Tübingen, Germany

    Peter Schroeder-Heister

Authors
  1. Peter Schroeder-Heister
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Schroeder-Heister.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schroeder-Heister, P. Validity Concepts in Proof-theoretic Semantics. Synthese 148, 525–571 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-004-6296-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-004-6296-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation