Skip to main content
Log in

A Method of Generating Modal Logics Defining Jaśkowski’s Discussive Logic D2

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Jaśkowski’s discussive logic D2 was formulated with the help of the modal logic S5 as follows (see [7, 8]): \({A \in {D_{2}}}\) iff \({\ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\rm S}5}\), where (–) is a translation of discussive formulae from Ford into the modal language. We say that a modal logic L defines D2 iff \({{\rm D}_{2} = \{A \in {\rm For^{\rm d}} : \ulcorner\diamond{{A}^{\bullet}}\urcorner \in {\it L}\}}\). In [14] and [10] were respectively presented the weakest normal and the weakest regular logic which (†): have the same theses beginning with ‘\({\diamond}\)’ as S5. Of course, all logics fulfilling the above condition, define D2. In [10] it was prowed that in the cases of logics closed under congruence the following holds: defining D2 is equivalent to having the property (†). In this paper we show that this equivalence holds also for all modal logics which are closed under replacement of tautological equivalents (rte-logics).

We give a general method which, for any class of modal logics determined by a set of joint axioms and rules, generates in the given class the weakest logic having the property (†). Thus, for the class of all modal logics we obtain the weakest modal logic which owns this property. On the other hand, applying the method to various classes of modal logics: rte-logics, congruential, monotonic, regular and normal, we obtain the weakest in a given class logic defining D2.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bull, R. A., and K. Segerberg, ‘Basic modal logic’, in M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, vol. II, D. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1984, pp. 1–88.

  2. Błaszczuk J.J., Dziobiak W.: ‘Remarks on Perzanowski’s modal system’. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 4, 57–64 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Błaszczuk, J. J., and W. Dziobiak, ‘Modal logics connected with systems S4 n of Sobociński’, Studia Logica 36: 151–175, 1977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chellas, B. F., and K. Segerberg, ‘Modal logics in the vicinity of S1’, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37: 1–24, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Furmanowski, T., ‘Remarks on discussive propositional calculus’, Studia Logica 34: 39–43, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jaśkowski, S., ‘Rachunek zdań dla systemów dedukcyjnych sprzecznych’, Studia Societatis Scientiarum Torunensis, Sect. A, I(5): 57–77, 1948. The first English version: ‘Propositional calculus for contradictory deductive systems’, Studia Logica 24: 143–157, 1969. The second English version: ‘A propositional calculus for inconsistent deductive systems’, Logic and Logical Philosophy 7: 35–56, 1999.

  8. Jaśkowski, S., ‘O koniunkcji dyskusyjnej w rachunku zdań dla systemów dedukcyjnych sprzecznych’, Studia Societatis Scientiarum Torunensis, Sect. A, I(8): 171–172, 1949. The English version: ‘On the discussive conjunction in the propositional calculus for inconsistent deductive systems’, Logic and Logical Philosophy 7: 57–59, 1999.

  9. Nasieniewski, M., ‘A comparison of two approaches to parainconsistency: Flemish and Polish’, Logic and Logical Philosophy 9: 47–74, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nasieniewski, M., and A. Pietruszczak, ‘The weakest regular modal logic defining Jaśkowski’s logic D2’, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 37(3/4): 197–210, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nasieniewski, M., and A. Pietruszczak, ‘New axiomatizations of the weakest regular modal logic defining Jaśkowski’s logic D2’, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 38(1/2): 45–50, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nasieniewski, M., and A. Pietruszczak, ‘Semantics for regular logics connected with Jaśkowski’s discussive logic D2’, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 38(3/4): 173–187, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nasieniewski, M., and A. Pietruszczak, ‘On modal logics defining Jaśkowski’s D2-consequence’. Accepted for the publication in the collection of papers presented during the Fourth World Congress of Paraconsistency, Melbourne, July 13–18, 2008.

  14. Perzanowski J.: ‘On M-fragments and L-fragments of normal modal propositional logics’. Reports on Mathematical Logic 5, 63–72 (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Segerberg, K., An Essay in Classical Modal Logic, vol. I and vol. II, Uppsala 1971.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marek Nasieniewski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nasieniewski, M., Pietruszczak, A. A Method of Generating Modal Logics Defining Jaśkowski’s Discussive Logic D2 . Stud Logica 97, 161–182 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-010-9302-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-010-9302-2

Keywords

Navigation