The Core Logic Paradox

Joseph Vidal-Rosset

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.09859

2019-05-24

Abstract:This paper provides a proof that Tennant's logical system entails a paradox that is called Core logic paradox, in reference to the new name given by Tennant to his intuitionistic relevant logic.

Logic

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Avoiding Contradictions in the Paradoxes, the Halting Problem, and Diagonalization

Timothy J. Armstrong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1509.08003

2015-09-29

Abstract:The fundamental proposal in this article is that logical formulas of the form (f <-> ~f) are not contradictions, and that formulas of the form (t <-> t) are not tautologies. Such formulas, wherever they appear in mathematics, are instead reason to conclude that f and t have a third truth value, different from true and false. These formulas are circular definitions of f and t. We can interpret the implication formula (f <-> ~f) as a rule, a procedure, to find the truth value of f on the left side: we just need to find the truth value of f on the right side. When we use the rules to ask if f and t are true or false, we need to keep asking if they are true or false over and over, forever. Russell's paradox and the liar paradox have the form (f <-> ~f). The truth value provides a straightforward means of avoiding contradictions in these problems. One broad consequence is that the technique of proof by contradiction involving formulas of the form (f <-> ~f) becomes invalid. One such proof by contradiction is one form of proof that the halting problem is uncomputable. The truth value also appears in Cantor's diagonal argument, Berry's paradox, and the Grelling-Nelson paradox.

Logic in Computer Science
Logic and Paradox

Xuezhi Yang

2023-08-07

Abstract:This article discusses the logical errors in the liar paradox, Gödel's incompleteness theorems, Russell's paradox, and the halting problem. In order to avoid these errors, a redefinition of logic has been presented, which is concluded as four principles in set-theoretic language, including 1. Don't talk about empty; 2. Elements of set should have identity; 3. Sets should have definitions; and 4. A total set should be defined. The new definition of logic can eliminate all paradoxes and invalid statements, thus becoming a solid foundation for human language and knowledge.

General Mathematics
Moore'S Paradox And The Logic Of Belief

ANDRÉS PÁEZ

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-6045.2020.V43N2.AP

2020-09-20

Manuscrito

Abstract:Páez, Andrés ; Moore's Paradox is a test case for any formal theory of belief. In Knowledge and Belief, Hintikka developed a multimodal logic for statements that express sentences containing the epistemic notions of knowledge and belief. His account purports to offer an explanation of the paradox. In this paper I argue that Hintikka's interpretation of one of the doxastic operators is philosophically problematic and leads to an unnecessarily strong logical system. I offer a weaker alternative that captures in a more accurate way our logical intuitions about the notion of belief without sacrificing the possibility of providing an explanation for problematic cases such as Moore's Paradox.

English Else
Theoremizing Yablo's Paradox

Ahmad Karimi,Saeed Salehi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1406.0134

2014-06-01

Abstract:To counter a general belief that all the paradoxes stem from a kind of circularity (or involve some self--reference, or use a diagonal argument) Stephen Yablo designed a paradox in 1993 that seemingly avoided self--reference. We turn Yablo's paradox, the most challenging paradox in the recent years, into a genuine mathematical theorem in Linear Temporal Logic (LTL). Indeed, Yablo's paradox comes in several varieties; and he showed in 2004 that there are other versions that are equally paradoxical. Formalizing these versions of Yablo's paradox, we prove some theorems in LTL. This is the first time that Yablo's paradox(es) become new(ly discovered) theorems in mathematics and logic.

Logic,Information Theory,Logic in Computer Science
Paracomplete Logic P1 and Logic Mechanism of Tolerate Paradox

Xu-dong HAO,Jian-jun ZHANG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13734/j.cnki.1000-5315.2015.01.002

2015-01-01

Abstract:Paracomplete logic P1 is a logic system allowing a proposition and its negation to be false at the same time, i.e., the general law of excluded middle in this logic system would be futile. Based on the standard grammar and syntax, this paper explains the logic implication of paracomplete negation, an?alyzes the logic syntactic characteristics, testifies the decidability of paracomplete logic quasi matrix with specific lining method, demonstrates the futility of general law of excluded middle in P 1 with quasi matrix method, analyzes the logic mechanism of paracomplete logic P 1 ’ s tolerance on logic paradox, and thus compares paraconsistent logic C1 and P1 on their tolerant ability.
Wittgenstein, Peirce, and paradoxes of mathematical proof

Sergiy Koshkin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phib.12177

2022-06-23

Abstract:Wittgenstein's paradoxical theses that unproved propositions are meaningless, proofs form new concepts and rules, and contradictions are of limited concern, led to a variety of interpretations, most of them centered on the rule-following skepticism. We argue that his intuitions rather reflect resistance to treating meaning as fixed content, and are better understood in the light of C.S. Peirce's distinction between corollarial and theorematic proofs. We show how Peirce's insight that "all necessary reasoning is diagrammatic", vindicated in modern epistemic logic and semantic information theory, helps explain the paradoxical ability of deduction to generate new knowledge and meaning.

Mathematics
Sometime a Paradox, Now Proof: Non-First-Order-izability of Yablo's Paradox

Saeed Salehi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jigpal/jzaa051

2020-07-01

Abstract:Paradoxes are interesting puzzles in philosophy and mathematics, and they could be even more fascinating, when turned into proofs and theorems. For example, Liar's paradox can be translated into a propositional tautology, and Barber's paradox turns into a first-order tautology. Russell's paradox, which collapsed Frege's foundational framework, is now a classical theorem in set theory, implying that no set of all sets can exist. Paradoxes can be used in proofs of some other theorems; Liar's paradox has been used in the classical proof of Tarski's theorem on the undefinability of truth in sufficiently rich languages. This paradox (and also Richard's paradox) appears implicitly in Gödel's proof of his celebrated first incompleteness theorem. In this paper, we study Yablo's paradox from the viewpoint of first and second order logics. We prove that a formalization of Yablo's paradox (which is second-order in nature) is non-first-order-izable in the sense of George Boolos (1984).

Logic
Non-Reflexive Nonsense: Proof Theory of Paracomplete Weak Kleene Logic

Bruno Da Ré,Damian Szmuc,María Inés Corbalán

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-023-10086-x

2024-03-19

Studia Logica

Abstract:Our aim is to provide a sequent calculus whose external consequence relation coincides with the three-valued paracomplete logic 'of nonsense' introduced by Dmitry Bochvar and, independently, presented as the weak Kleene logic by Stephen C. Kleene. The main features of this calculus are (i) that it is non-reflexive , i.e., Identity is not included as an explicit rule (although a restricted form of it with premises is derivable); (ii) that it includes rules where no variable-inclusion conditions are attached; and (iii) that it is hybrid , insofar as it includes both left and right operational introduction as well as elimination rules.

mathematics,logic
Coarsening Natural Deduction Proofs I: Finding Perfect Proofs

Ethan Brauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exad077

2024-01-03

Journal of Logic and Computation

Abstract:Abstract This paper explores how, given a proof, we can systematically transform it into a proof that contains no irrelevancies and which is as strong as possible. I define a weaker and stronger notion of what counts as a proof with no irrelevancies, calling them perfect proofs and gaunt proofs, respectively. Using classical core logic to study classical validities and core logic to study intuitionistic validities, I show that every core proof or classical core proof can be transformed into a perfect proof. In a sequel paper, I show how proofs in core logic can also be transformed into gaunt proofs and I observe that this property fails for classical core logic.

computer science, theory & methods,logic
Turing Machine Halting Problem, Russell’s Paradox and Gödel Incompleteness Theorem

Hong Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22158/jrph.v7n1p22

2024-01-21

Journal of Research in Philosophy and History

Abstract:The Turing Machine Halting Problem is a major problem in computer theory, Russell’s Paradox is the root of the Third Mathematical Crisis, and the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem is a major discovery in modern logic. The three have had a profound impact on the development of science and have attracted the attention of scientific and philosophical circles. However, since the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem was put forward, the scientific and philosophical significance of its proof has been questioned; in particular, Wittgenstein regards it as a certain logical paradox, and Russell’s Paradox has not yet been settled. This paper makes a detailed analysis of the three based on the view of dialectical infinity. The author notes that the Principle of Comprehension based on the view of actual infinity is the root of Russell’s Paradox. The Turing Machine Halting Problem shows that it is impossible to make an actual-infinite ultimate judgment of the constantly generated infinite world, but the philosophical significance of the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem is that our understanding of the world is essentially potentially infinite. At the end of the article, the author raises several questions about the proof of the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem, finds out the specific paradox form in the proof, points out the high consistency of its proof method and Russell’s Paradox, which strongly supports Wittgenstein’s view. The author points out that the philosophical basis of the proof of the Gödel Incompleteness Theorem is the idea of actual infinity, the proof of the theorem is based on a logically invalid circular formula, the contradiction of the proof originates from the Gödel formula itself, and cannot be attributed to the incompleteness of the system, so the proof is wrong. Therefore, the conclusion of this paper is that the world is constantly developing and changing, and our human understanding of the world is essentially a potential infinite, that is, the world is Aristotelian, not Platonic.
The Goedel's legacy: revisiting the Logic

Giuseppe Raguni'

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1206.2023

2013-05-02

Abstract:Some common fallacies about fundamental themes of Logic are exposed: the First and Second incompleteness Theorem interpretations, Chaitin's various superficialities and the usual classification of the axiomatic Theories in function of its language order.

Logic
Beware of the Gödel- Wette paradox

Alexander S. Yessenin-Volpin,Christer Hennix

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.math/0110094

2001-10-09

Logic

Abstract:This paper gives a counterexample to the impossibility, by G\"odel's second incompleteness theorem, of proving a formula expressing the consistency of arithmetic in a fragment of arithmetic on the assumption that the latter is consistent. This counterexample gives rise to a new type of metamathematical paradox, to be called the G\"odel-Wette paradox, which E. Wette claims to have established since some time ago (see [Wette, 1971], [Wette, 1974]). Nevertheless, our work is independent of Wette's since we have failed to understand the details of his work although we recognize the possibility of the correctness of the latter. Furthermore, the G\"odel-Wette paradox is not the only foundational anomaly which the framework of our approach has uncovered but new questions concerning the decision problem, completeness problem, truth definitions and the status of Richard's paradox in arithmetic and set theory (including type theory) have arisen as well. This work will, eventually be unified into a single monograph.
The Jacobson Radical of a Propositional Theory

GIULIO FELLIN,PETER SCHUSTER,DANIEL WESSEL,Giulio Fellin,Peter Schuster,Daniel Wessel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/bsl.2021.66

2021-12-02

Abstract:Alongside the analogy between maximal ideals and complete theories, the Jacobson radical carries over from ideals of commutative rings to theories of propositional calculi. This prompts a variant of Lindenbaum’s Lemma that relates classical validity and intuitionistic provability, and the syntactical counterpart of which is Glivenko’s Theorem. The Jacobson radical in fact turns out to coincide with the classical deductive closure. As a by-product we obtain a possible interpretation in logic of the axioms-as-rules conservation criterion for a multi-conclusion Scott-style entailment relation over a single-conclusion one.

mathematics,logic
Coarsening natural deduction proofs II: finding gaunt proofs

Ethan Brauer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/exae003

2024-02-19

Journal of Logic and Computation

Abstract:Abstract This paper is the second part of a series exploring how, given a proof, we can inductively transform it into a proof that contains no irrelevancies and is as strong as possible. In the prequel paper, I defined a weaker and a stronger notion of what counts as a proof with no irrelevancies, calling them perfect proofs and gaunt proofs, respectively. There, I showed how proofs in core logic and classical core logic can be transformed into perfect proofs. In this paper I study gaunt proofs. I show how proofs in core logic can be inductively transformed into gaunt core proofs, but that this property fails for the natural deduction system of classical core logic.

computer science, theory & methods,logic
Paradox regained: Life beyond Goedel's shadow

Bhupinder Singh Anand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.math/0201307

2002-01-30

General Mathematics

Abstract:Goedel's explicit thesis was that his undecidable formula GUS is a well-formed, well-defined formal sentence in any formalisation of Intuitive Arithmetic IA in which the axioms and rules of inference are recursively definable. His implicit thesis was that GUS is not formally inconsistent in any such system. I argue in a constructive, intuitionistically unobjectionable, and recursively definable formalisation PP of IA that GUS is a well-formed formula but an ill-defined formal sentence reflecting the "Liar" paradox in PP. Further, introducing "formal truth" and "provability" values to selected propositions of IA through PP leads to the collapse of Lucas' Goedelian argument.
Linguistic Paradoxes and Tautologies

Florentin Smarandache

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.math/0010120

2000-10-13

Abstract:Classes of linguistic paradoxes and linguistic tautologies are introduced with examples and explanations. They are part of the author's work on the Paradoxist Philosophy based on mathematical logic. The general cases exposed below are modeled on the English language structure in a rigid way. In order to find nice particular examples of such paradoxes and tautologies one grammatically adjusts the sentences.

General Mathematics
Reasoning Around Paradox with Grounded Deduction

Bryan Ford

2024-10-13

Abstract:How can we reason around logical paradoxes without falling into them? This paper introduces grounded deduction or GD, a Kripke-inspired approach to first-order logic and arithmetic that is neither classical nor intuitionistic, but nevertheless appears both pragmatically usable and intuitively justifiable. GD permits the direct expression of unrestricted recursive definitions - including paradoxical ones such as 'L := not L' - while adding dynamic typing premises to certain inference rules so that such paradoxes do not lead to inconsistency. This paper constitutes a preliminary development and investigation of grounded deduction, to be extended with further elaboration and deeper analysis of its intriguing properties.

Logic,Logic in Computer Science
Paradoxes of Definability, Russell’s Paradox, the Liar

Keith Simmons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198791546.003.0005

2018-07-19

Abstract:Chapter 5 moves beyond the simple paradoxes discussed in Chapters 2-4. The chapter applies the singularity approach to the traditional paradoxes of definability (or denotation), associated with Berry, Richard, and König. The chapter goes on to argue that there are two settings for Russell’s paradox, one in terms of the mathematical notion of set, and the other in terms of the logico-semantic notion of extension. The chapter then applies the singularity approach to Russell’s paradox for extensions. The chapter moves on to the case of truth, and applies the singularity approach to various versions of the Liar paradox, paying particular attention to the so-called strengthened Liar .
Logic and computation as combinatorics

Norihiro Yamada

2023-06-13

Abstract:The syntactic nature of logic and computation separates them from other fields of mathematics. Nevertheless, syntax has been the only way to adequately capture the dynamics of proofs and programs such as cut-elimination, and the finiteness and the atomicity of syntax are preferable for foundational aims as seen in Hilbert's program. Another issue is that a uniform basis for logic and computation has been missing, and this problem hampers a coherent view on them. For instance, formal proofs in proof theory are far from (ordinary) proofs of the validity of a formula in model theory. Our goal is to solve these fundamental problems by rebuilding central concepts in logic and computation such as formal systems, validity (in such a way that it coincides with the existence of proofs), cut-elimination and computability uniformly in terms of finite graphs based on game semantics. Unlike game semantics, however, we do not rely on anything infinite or extrinsic to the graphs. A key idea that enables our finitary, autonomous approach is the shift from graphs in game semantics to dynamic ones. The resulting combinatorics establishes a single, syntax-free, finitary framework that recasts formal systems admitting proofs with cuts, validity, the finest computational steps of cut-elimination and higher-order computability. This subsumes fully complete semantics of intuitionistic linear logic, which solves a problem open for thirty years, and even extends the full completeness to proofs with cuts. As a byproduct, our dynamic graphs give rise to Hopf algebras, which opens up new applications of algebras to logic and computation.

Logic,Logic in Computer Science,Combinatorics
Weak set theories in foundational debates

A R D Mathias

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2022.0009

2023-05-29

Abstract:Perception of the relationship of the discipline of logic to other exact sciences changes with the years. No twentieth-century proposal for a single logical system that would support the whole of mathematics satisfied everyone, so weaker formal systems with applications in many different contexts are now sought, in mathematics, philosophy, computer science or elsewhere. As always, logicians help by asking such questions as 'Is this theory correct for the given context?' and 'Can it be used in other contexts?' The Introduction of this paper surveys the history of logic and its links to other scientific disciplines such as biology, economics, engineering and physics, and some details of current and future research projects are given. Then the very weak set theory PROVI is introduced and its support for the techniques of constructibility (Gödel 1935) and forcing (Cohen PJ 1963 The independence of the continuum hypothesis, I. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 50, 1143-1148. (doi:10.1073/pnas.50.6.1143)) is given in outline, full details being already in print. Relations with other known techniques are explored and developed. New results coming from the study of illfounded [Formula: see text]-models of PROVI and other systems are given; and new formal systems in the style of Quine (1937 Quine WV. 1936 Set-theoretic foundations for logic. J. Symb. Log. 1, 45-57. (doi:10.2307/2268548)) are described. This article is part of the theme issue 'Modern perspectives in Proof Theory'.

The Core Logic Paradox

Avoiding Contradictions in the Paradoxes, the Halting Problem, and Diagonalization

Logic and Paradox

Moore'S Paradox And The Logic Of Belief

Theoremizing Yablo's Paradox

Paracomplete Logic P1 and Logic Mechanism of Tolerate Paradox

Wittgenstein, Peirce, and paradoxes of mathematical proof

Sometime a Paradox, Now Proof: Non-First-Order-izability of Yablo's Paradox

Non-Reflexive Nonsense: Proof Theory of Paracomplete Weak Kleene Logic

Coarsening Natural Deduction Proofs I: Finding Perfect Proofs

Turing Machine Halting Problem, Russell’s Paradox and Gödel Incompleteness Theorem

The Goedel's legacy: revisiting the Logic

Beware of the Gödel- Wette paradox

The Jacobson Radical of a Propositional Theory

Coarsening natural deduction proofs II: finding gaunt proofs

Paradox regained: Life beyond Goedel's shadow

Linguistic Paradoxes and Tautologies

Reasoning Around Paradox with Grounded Deduction

Paradoxes of Definability, Russell’s Paradox, the Liar

Logic and computation as combinatorics

Weak set theories in foundational debates