UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO INSTITUTO DE INVESTIGACIONES FILOSÓFICAS

A bit of connexivity around the Field of ordinary conditionals

In this brief note we explore a couple of features of the semantics for indicative conditionals provided by Field. Those features strikingly resemble some controversial principles in connexive logic. We will show that although Field’s semantics has the technical means to stand to the mentioned features, more work is needed to make some of its outcomes less unintuitive.

_{Australasian Philosophical Review 4, 2021}
Leer más »

Non-conditional Contracting Connectives

Abstract
It has been claimed that contracting connectives are conditionals. Our modest aim here is to show that the conditional-like features of a contracting connective depend on the defining features of the conditional in a particular logic, yes, but they also depend on the underlying notion of logical consequence and the structure of the collection of truth values. More concretely, we will show that under P-consequence and suitable satisfiability conditions for the conditional, conjunctions are contracting connectives for some logics without thereby being conditional-ish.

_{Mathematics, Logic, and their Philosophies, 2021}
Leer más »

Knot is not that nasty (but it is hardier than tonk)

Abstract
In this paper, we evaluate Button’s claim that knot is a nasty connective. Knot’s nastiness is due to the fact that, when one extends the set {¬,∨,∧,→} with knot, the connective provides counterexamples to a number of classically valid operational rules in a sequent calculus proof system. We show that just as going non-transitive diminishes tonk’s nastiness, knot’s nastiness can also be reduced by dropping Reflexivity, a different structural rule. Since doing so restores all other rules in the system as validity-preserving, we are inclined to conclude that there, knot is not that nasty. However, since motivating non-reflexivity is harder than motivating non-transitivity, we also acknowledge that disagreement with our conclusion is possible.

_{Synthese volume 198, 2019}
Leer más »

A comparison of connexive logics

Abstract
The most widespread criterion for the admission of a logic into the connexive family is the satisfaction of the pairs of formulas known as Aristotle’s and Boethius’ theses, along with the non-symmetry of implication. In this paper, we discuss whether this is enough to characterize a connexive logic or if more can be said about the issue. Our strategy is the following: first, we introduce a logic that has origins and motivations that have little to do with connexive logic. We then present a list of additional criteria found scattered throughout the literature on connexivity and propose to use this list to compare this logic and some of the well-known non-bivalent truth-functional connexive logics. This comparison gives us several interesting results: when every condition is given the same weight, the introduced logic can score as high as some of the well- known systems. Furthermore, a connection between the satisfaction of the most conditions and the loss of intuitiveness or an increase in the complexity of certain structural properties of the system seems to arise. We take these results to motivate the more general open problem of finding the most adequate way of judging systems of connexive logic.

_{Journal of Applied Logics - IfCoLog Journal,  2016}
Leer más »