Logica Universalis

, Volume 10, Issue 2–3, pp 313–325

Generalization and Composition of Modal Squares of Oppositions

Article

Abstract

The first part of the paper aims at showing that the notion of an Aristotelian square may be seen as a special case of a variety of different more general notions: (1) the one of a subAristotelian square, (2) the one of a semiAristotelian square, (3) the one of an Aristotelian cube, which is a construction made up of six semiAristotelian squares, two of which are Aristotelian. Furthermore, if the standard Aristotelian square is seen as a special ordered 4-tuple of formulas, there are 4-tuples describing rotations of the original square which are non-standard Aristotelian squares. The second part of the paper focuses on the notion of a composition of squares. After a discussion of possible alternative definitions, a privileged notion of composition of squares is identified, thus opening the road to introducing and discussing the wider notion of composition of cubes.

Keywords

Square of oppositions modal logic bimodality cube of oppositions composition of squares 

Mathematics Subject Classification

03B45 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Carnielli W., Pizzi C.: Modalities and Multimodalities. Springer, New York (2008)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dubois, D., Pradel, H., Rico, A.: The cube of opposition—a structure underlying many knowledge representation formalisms. In: Yang, Q., Wooldrige M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Palo Alto, pp. 2933–2939 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lenzen,W.: How to square knowledge and belief. In: Beziau, J.Y., Jacquette, D. (eds.) Around and Beyond the Square of Oppositions, Basel, pp. 305–311 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moretti, A.: The Geometry of Logical Opposition. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Neuchâtel (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pizzi C.: Aristotle’s cubes and consequential implication. Logica Universalis 5, 143–153 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pizzi, C.: Contingency logics and modal squares of opposition. In: Béziau, J.Y., Gam-Krywoszynska, K. (eds.) New Dimensions of the Square of Opposition, München, pp. 201–222 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reichenbach H.: The syllogism revised. Philos. Sci. 3, 1–16 (1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Westerstahl, D.: Classical vs. modern squares of opposition, and beyond. In: Béziau, J.Y., Payette G. (eds.) The Square of Opposition: A General Framework for Cognition, Bern, pp.195–229 (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Emeritus University of SienaMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations