Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:34:36.497Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Algebraic semantics for modal logics I

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

E. J. Lemmon
E. J. Lemmon*
Affiliation:
Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Modal logic received its modern impetus from the work of Lewis and Langford [10]. In recent years, however, their axiomatic approach, aided by somewhat ad hoc matrices for distinguishing different modal systems, has been supplemented by other techniques. Two of the most profound of these were, first, the algebraic methods employed by McKinsey and Tarski (see [11] and [12]) and, second, the semantic method of Kripke (see [5] and [6]); and there have been others. The aim of the present series of papers is to afford a synthesis of these methods. Thus, though new results are given, the interest lies rather in revealing interconnexions between familiar results and in providing a general framework for future research. In general, we show that semantic completeness results of the Kripke kind can be deduced from the algebraic results by means of one central theorem (Theorem 21).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 1966 , pp. 46 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Church, A., Introduction to mathematical logic I, Princeton, 1956.Google Scholar
[2]Dummett, M. A. E. and Lemmon, E. J., Modal logics between S4 and S5, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 5 (1959), pp. 250–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Feys, R., Les logiques nouvelles des modalités, Revue néoscholastique de philosophie, vol. 40 (1937), pp. 517–533, and vol. 41 (1938), pp. 217–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Kripke, Saul A., Semantic analysis of modal logic (abstract), this Journal, vol. 24 (1959), pp. 323–324.Google Scholar
[5]Kripke, Saul A., A completeness theorem in modal logic, this Journal, vol. 24 (1959), pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
[6]Kripke, Saul A., Semantical analysis of modal logici I, Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 9 (1963), pp. 67–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Lemmon, E. J., New foundations for Lewis modal systems, this Journal, vol. 22 (1957), pp. 176–186.Google Scholar
[8]Lemmon, E. J., Extension algebras and the modal system T, Notre Dame journal of formal logic, vol. 1 (1960), pp. 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Lemmon, E. J., Deontic logic and the logic of imperatives, Logique et analyse, vol. 8 (1965), pp. 39–71.Google Scholar
[10]Lewis, C I. and Langford, C. H., Symbolic logic, New York, 1932.Google Scholar
[11]McKinsey, J. C. C., A solution of the decision problem for the Lewis systems S2 and S4, with an application to topology, this Journal, vol. 6 (1941), pp. 117–134.Google Scholar
[12]McKinsey, J. C. C. and Tarski, Alfred, Some theorems about the sentential calculi of Lewis and Heyting, this Journal, vol. 13 (1948), pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
[13]Ore, Oystein, Graphs and their uses, New York, 1963.Google Scholar
[14]Prior, A. N., Possible worlds, Philosophical quarterly, vol. 12 (1962), pp. 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Rosenbloom, P., The elements of mathematical logic, New York, 1950.Google Scholar
[16]Thomas, Ivo, A final note on S1° and the Brouwerian axioms, Notre Dame journal of formal logic, vol. 4 (1963), pp. 231–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]von Wright, G. H., An essay In modal logic, North-Holland, 1951.Google Scholar