Propositional Identity, Truth According to Predication and Strong Implication

In contemporary philosophy of language, mind and action, propositions are not only Senses of sentences with truth conditions but also contents of conceptual thoughts like illocutionary acts and attitudes that human agents perform and express. It is quite clear that propositions with the same truth conditions are not the senses of the same sentences, just as they are not the contents of the same thoughts. To account for that fact, the logic of propositions according to predication advocates finer criteria of propositional identity than logical equivalence and requires of competent speakers less than perfect rationality. Unlike classical logic it analyzes the structure of constituents of propositions. The logic is predicative in the very general sense that it analyzes the type of propositions by mainly taking into consideration the acts of predication that we make in expressing and understanding them. Predicative logic distinguishes strictly equivalent propositions whose expression requires different acts of predication or whose truth conditions are understood in different ways. It also explicates a new relation of strong implication between propositions much finer than strict implication and important for the analysis of psychological and illocutionary commitments. The main purpose of this work is to present and enrich the logic of propositions according to predication by analyzing elementary propositions that predicate all kinds of attributes (extensional or not) as well as modal propositions according to which it is necessary, possible or contingent that things are so and so. I will first explain how predicative logic analyzes the structure of constituents and truth conditions of propositions expressible in the modal predicate calculus without quantifiers. The ideal object language of my logic is a natural extension of that of the minimal logic of propositions. Next I will define the structure of a model and I will formulate an axiomatic system. At the end I will enumerate important valid laws. The present work on propositional logic is part of my next book Propositions, Truth and Thought which formulates a more general logic of propositions according to predication analyzing also generalization, ramified time, historic modalities as well as action and attitudes.

[1]  N. Belnap.  Backwards and Forwards in the Modal Logic of Agency , 1991 .

[2]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  A complete minimal logic of the propositional contents of thought , 1995, Stud Logica.

[3]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  Attempt, Success and Action Generation: A Logical Study of Intentional Action , 2005, Logic, Thought and Action.

[4]  Nuel D. Belnap,et al.  Entailment : the logic of relevance and necessity , 1975 .

[5]  Charles Parsons,et al.  Quality and Concept , 1987 .

[6]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  Foundations of Illocutionary Logic , 1985 .

[7]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR AND SPEECH ACT THEORY , 2001 .

[8]  Peter F. Strawson.  Subject and Predicate in Logic and Grammar , 1974 .

[9]  L. Wittgenstein.  Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus , 2021, Nordic Wittgenstein Review.

[10]  Lennart Åqvist.  A conjectured axiomatization of two-dimensional Reichenbachian tense logic , 1979, J. Philos. Log..

[11]  M. Cresswell.  Hyperintensional logic , 1975 .

[12]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  Chapter 2. Universal Grammar and Speech Act Theory , 2001 .

[13]  Jorge Rodriguez Marqueze.  On the Logical Form of Propositions: Some Problems for Vanderveken's New Theory of Propositions , 1993 .

[14]  C. Lewis,et al.  A Survey Of Symbolic Logic , 1920 .

[15]  Christopher Cherniak,et al.  Minimal Rationality , 1986, Computational models of cognition and perception.

[16]  P. French,et al.  Contemporary perspectives in the philosophy of language , 1989 .

[17]  J. Altham.  Naming and necessity. , 1981 .

[18]  Rudolf Carnap,et al.  Meaning and Necessity , 1947 .

[19]  Daniel Vanderveken.  A New Formulation of the Logic of Propositions , 1995 .

[20]  Kit Fine,et al.  Analytic implication , 1986, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[21]  E. Hannum.  INDIVIDUALS , 1934, Francis W. Parker School Studies in Education.

[22]  David Kaplan,et al.  How to Russell a Frege-Church , 1975 .

[23]  N. Malcolm.  On Knowledge and Belief , 1954 .

[24]  L. Couturat,et al.  Opuscules et Fragments Inédits de Leibniz : Extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque royale de Hanovre , 1903 .

[25]  Daniel Vanderveken.  Logic, Thought and Action , 2005, Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science.

[26]  G. B. M..  Principia Mathematica , 1911, Nature.

[27]  Saul A. Kripke,et al.  Naming and Necessity , 1980 .

[28]  Daniel Vanderveken,et al.  The Minimal Logic of Propositional Contents of Thought: a Completeness Theorem , 1996 .

[29]  Peter F. Strawson,et al.  Subject and Predicate in Logic and Grammar , 1976 .

[30]  Daniel Vanderveken.  Attempt, success and action generation , 2002 .