Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T20:40:12.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A formalisation of referentially opaque contexts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

L. Jonathan Cohen
L. Jonathan Cohen*
Affiliation:
The Queen's College Oxford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In most published systems of modal logic only one or two modal operators occur as undefined constants alongside the primitives of non-modal logic. But in a single informal argument many non-interdefinable modal operators may occur. E.g. in philosophy we may have ‘it is logically true that’, ‘it is analytic that’, and ‘it is physically necessary that’; and in jurisprudence or private international law we may have statements about what it is obligatory or not obligatory to do under several different systems of rules. Moreover even if the contexts of such operators are all referentially opaque, in Quine's sense [1] of being exempt from the substitutivity of truth-functional biconditionals, some are, as it were, opaquer than others, in being exempt from the substitutivity of certain non-truth-functional biconditionals as well.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , September 1960 , pp. 193 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1960

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]Quine, W. V., From a logical point of view, Cambridge, 1953.Google Scholar
[2]Lewis, C. I. and Landford, C. H., Symbolic logic, New York, 1932.Google Scholar
[3]Barcan, R. C., A functional calculus of first order based on strict implication, this Journal, vol. 11 (1946), pp. 1–16.Google Scholar
[4]Lemmon, E. J., New foundations for Lewis modal systems, this Journal, vol. 22 (1957), pp. 176–186.Google Scholar
[5]Lemmon, E. J., Is there only one correct system of modal logic?, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, supplementary vol. 33 (1959), pp. 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Barcan, R. C., The identity of individuals in a strict functional calculus of second order, this Journal, vol. 12 (1947), pp. 12–15.Google Scholar
[7]Łukasiewicz, J., Aristotle's syllogistic, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1957.Google Scholar
[8]Cohen, L.Jonathan, Can the logic of indirect discourse be formalised? this Journal, vol. 22 (1957), pp. 225–232.Google Scholar
[9]Cohen, L. Jonathan, Why do Cretans have to say much?, forthcoming in Philosophical studies.Google Scholar