A Logic of Direct Evidence

[Philip Thrift]

A Logic of Direct Evidence

Sungwoo Park

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9f61/84a9492deb75d64209f1368d7860f851c1bd.pdf

"This paper presents a system of modal logic that is capable of expressing the notion of normal proof within the system itself. That is, the system has a means for both recognizing and manipulating its own normal proofs, thereby making normal proofs an inherent property of the logic. As an application, we present an authorization logic whose unique feature is to distinguish between “what a principal would affirm via inference” and “what a principal explicitly says.”

@philipthrift

[Bruno Marchal]

Very good paper. It is close to the machine’s the logic of []p & p, S4Grz (with the triangle as modality) but also to X1*. 

But with mechanism, we cannot chose the axioms in the phenomenology of mind, nor in the phenomenology of matter, as we have to derive it from G and G*. Note that the author mention the similarity with the provability logics.

Bruno

@philipthrift

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a8e4eed6-1b0c-4df8-aae1-c01c75aa2228%40googlegroups.com.