Journal of Philosophical Logic

, Volume 35, Issue 6, pp 587–598 | Cite as

Relevant Restricted Quantification

  • JC Beall
  • Ross T. Brady
  • A. P. Hazen
  • Graham Priest
  • Greg Restall
Article

Abstract

The paper reviews a number of approaches for handling restricted quantification in relevant logic, and proposes a novel one. This proceeds by introducing a novel kind of enthymematic conditional.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beall, JC. (2004): Curry's Paradox, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2004 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2004/entries/curry-paradox/.
  2. Belnap, N. D. (1973): Restricted quantification and conditional assertion, Ch. 2, in H. Leblanc (ed.), Truth, Syntax and Modality, North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  3. Brady, R. T. (2003): Relevant Logic and their Rivals, Vol. II, Ashgate, Aldershot.Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, D. (1992): Relevant implication and conditional assertion, in A. Anderson, N. D. Belnap and J. M. Dunn (eds.), Entailment, Vol. II, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, pp. 472–487.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, N. (1968): The propositional logic of ordinary discourse, Inquiry 11, 295–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Meyer, R. K. and Routley, R. (1973): Classical relevant logics, I, Stud. Log. 32, 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Priest, G. (1987): In Contradiction, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  8. Priest, G. (2001): Introduction to Non-Classical Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  9. Restall, G. (1993): How to be really contraction-free, Stud. Log. 52, 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Restall, G. (1995): Four-valued semantics for relevant logics (and some of their rivals), J. Philos. Logic 24, 139–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Restall, G. (2000): Introduction to Substructural Logics, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  12. Routley, R. (1984): The American plan completed: alternative classical-style semantics, without stars, for relevant and paraconsistent logics, Stud. Log. 43, 131–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sylvan, R. and Nola, R. (1991): Confirmation without paradoxes, in G. Schurz and G. Dorn (eds.), Advances in Scientific Philosophy, Rodophi, Amsterdam, pp. 5–44; reprinted as ch. 10 of D. Hyde and G. Priest (eds.), Sociative Logics and their Applications: Essays by the Late Richard Sylvan, Ashgate, Aldershot (2000).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • JC Beall
    • 1
  • Ross T. Brady
    • 2
  • A. P. Hazen
    • 3
  • Graham Priest
    • 3
  • Greg Restall
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of ConnecticutStorrsUSA
  2. 2.Department of PhilosophyLa Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations