Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
  1. Home
  2. Journal of Philosophical Logic
  3. Article
Wright’s Strict Finitistic Logic in the Classical Metatheory: The Propositional Case
Download PDF
Your article has downloaded

Similar articles being viewed by others

Slider with three articles shown per slide. Use the Previous and Next buttons to navigate the slides or the slide controller buttons at the end to navigate through each slide.

On the Proof Theory of Infinitary Modal Logic

01 June 2022

Matteo Tesi

An ecumenical notion of entailment

03 May 2019

Elaine Pimentel, Luiz Carlos Pereira & Valeria de Paiva

A More Unified Approach to Free Logics

17 August 2020

Edi Pavlović & Norbert Gratzl

A plea for KR

28 May 2019

Alison Duncan Kerr

Sequent calculus for classical logic probabilized

07 May 2018

Marija Boričić

Inferential Constants

26 October 2022

Camillo Fiore, Federico Pailos & Mariela Rubin

Meta-inferences and Supervaluationism

03 August 2021

Luca Incurvati & Julian J. Schlöder

Classical Logic is not Uniquely Characterizable

21 January 2022

Isabella McAllister

De Finettian Logics of Indicative Conditionals Part II: Proof Theory and Algebraic Semantics

29 January 2021

Paul Égré, Lorenzo Rossi & Jan Sprenger

Download PDF
  • Open Access
  • Published: 21 January 2023

Wright’s Strict Finitistic Logic in the Classical Metatheory: The Propositional Case

  • Takahiro Yamada  ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8950-29791 

Journal of Philosophical Logic (2023)Cite this article

  • 109 Accesses

  • 3 Altmetric

  • Metrics details

Abstract

Crispin Wright in his 1982 paper argues for strict finitism, a constructive standpoint that is more restrictive than intuitionism. In its appendix, he proposes models of strict finitistic arithmetic. They are tree-like structures, formed in his strict finitistic metatheory, of equations between numerals on which concrete arithmetical sentences are evaluated. As a first step towards classical formalisation of strict finitism, we propose their counterparts in the classical metatheory with one additional assumption, and then extract the propositional part of ‘strict finitistic logic’ from it and investigate. We will provide a sound and complete pair of a Kripke-style semantics and a sequent calculus, and compare with other logics. The logic lacks the law of excluded middle and Modus Ponens and is weaker than classical logic, but stronger than any proper intermediate logics in terms of theoremhood. In fact, all the other well-known classical theorems are found to be theorems. Finally, we will make an observation that models of this semantics can be seen as nodes of an intuitionistic model.

Download to read the full article text

Working on a manuscript?

Avoid the common mistakes

References

  1. Dean, W. (2018). Strict finitism, feasibility, and the sorites. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 11(2), 295–346. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755020318000163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dummett, M. (1975). Wang’s paradox. In Truth and other enigmas. chap 15, published in 1978 (pp. 248–68). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  3. Lifschitz, V., Pearce, D., & Valverde, A. (2001). Strongly equivalent logic programs. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 2(40), 526–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/383779.383783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Magidor, O. (2012). Strict finitism and the happy sorites. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 41(2), 471–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-011-9180-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Murzi, J. (2010). Knowability and bivalence: Intuitionistic solutions to the paradox of knowability. Philosophical Studies, 149, 269–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-009-9349-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tennant, N. (1997). The Taiming of the true. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wright, C. (1982). Strict finitism. In Realism, meaning and truth. chap 4, 2nd edition in 1993 (pp. 107–75). Oxford U.K.; Cambridge U.S.A.: Blackwell Publishers.

  8. Yessenin-Volpin, A.S. (1970). The ultra-intuitionistic criticism and the antitraditional program for foundations of mathematics. In A. Kino, J. Myhill, & R. Vesley (Eds.) Intuitionism and proof theory (pp. 3–45). Amsterdam, London, Buffalo N.Y.: North-Holland Publishing Company, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0049-237x(08)70738-9.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Rosalie Iemhoff for her everyday, most insightful and helpful pieces of advice. I am also grateful to Amirhossein Akbar Tabatabai for his penetrating comments: indeed, it was he who first suggested the relation with IPC. I sincerely thank an anonymous referee for extremely helpful comments and suggestions. Some of the rudimentary versions of the present article were presented at the OZSW Conference 2020, the 3rd Workshop on Proof Theory and its Applications in 2021 and the Dutch Logic PhD Day 2022. This study was conducted under the doctoral supervision by Professor Rosalie Iemhoff at Utrecht University.

Funding

This study was funded under the name of ‘Graduate Scholarship for Degree Seeking Students’ by Japan Student Services Organisation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Utrecht University, Janskerkhof 13, Utrecht, 3512 BL, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Takahiro Yamada

Authors
  1. Takahiro Yamada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takahiro Yamada.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yamada, T. Wright’s Strict Finitistic Logic in the Classical Metatheory: The Propositional Case. J Philos Logic (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-022-09698-w

Download citation

  • Received: 02 March 2021

  • Accepted: 27 December 2022

  • Published: 21 January 2023

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-022-09698-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Strict finitism
  • Crispin Wright
  • Constructivism
  • Finitism
  • Classical reconstruction
Download PDF

Working on a manuscript?

Avoid the common mistakes

Advertisement

Over 10 million scientific documents at your fingertips

Switch Edition
  • Academic Edition
  • Corporate Edition
  • Home
  • Impressum
  • Legal information
  • Privacy statement
  • California Privacy Statement
  • How we use cookies
  • Manage cookies/Do not sell my data
  • Accessibility
  • FAQ
  • Contact us
  • Affiliate program

Not affiliated

Springer Nature

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature.