Access the full text.
Sign up today, get an introductory month for just $19.
G. Antonelli (2012)
Frege's TheoremInternational Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 26
R. Brady (1971)
The consistency of the axioms of abstraction and extensionality in a three-valued logicNotre Dame J. Formal Log., 12
Richard Routley (1977)
Reprinted in [41]
Michael Hallett (1984)
Hallett, Michael, Cantorian Set Theory and Limitation of Size, Oxford Logic Guides, 1984.
Graham Priest
Priest, Graham, ‘Reductio ad absurdum et modus tollendo ponens’, in Priest et al. [38], pp. 613–626.
Graham Priest (1989)
Essays on the Inconsistent
Z. Weber (2010)
TRANSFINITE NUMBERS IN PARACONSISTENT SET THEORYThe Review of Symbolic Logic, 3
Graham Priest
Priest, Graham, and Richard Routley, ‘Systems of paraconsistent logic’, in Priest et al. [38], pp. 151–186.
Ross T. Brady
Brady, Ross T., and Richard Routley, ‘The non-triviality of extensional dialectical set theory’, in Priest et al. [38], pp. 415–436.
Thomas Forster (1982)
Forster, Thomas, ‘Axiomatising set theory with a universal set’, 1982. Typeset 1997.
Susan Rogerson, S. Butchart (2002)
Naïve Comprehension and Contracting ImplicationsStudia Logica, 71
A. Hunter (1998)
Paraconsistent logics
Graham Priest (2006)
Priest, Graham, Doubt Truth Be A Liar, Oxford, 2006.
Richard White (1979)
The consistency of the axiom of comprehension in the infinite-valued predicate logic of ŁukasiewiczJournal of Philosophical Logic, 8
G. Priest (2001)
An introduction to non-classical logic
G. Priest (1994)
Is arithmetic consistentMind, 103
E. Mares (1992)
Semantics for relevance logic with identityStudia Logica, 51
G. Priest (1980)
Sense, entailment and Modus ponensJournal of Philosophical Logic, 9
Ross Brady (2006)
Brady, Ross, Universal Logic, CSLI, 2006.
J. Michael Dunn (2002)
Dunn, J. Michael, and Greg Restall. ‘Relevance logic’, in Dov M. Gabbay and Franz Günthner, (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd Edition, volume 6, Kluwer, 2002, pp. 1–128.
Thierry Libert (2004)
Libert, Thierry, ‘Models for paraconsistent set theory’, Journal of Applied Logic, 3, 2004.
Richard Routley (1980)
Interim Edition, Departmental Monograph number 3
Ed Zalta (2007)
Zalta, Ed, ‘Frege’s theorem’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2007.
G. Priest, R. Routley (1989)
Systems of paraconsistent logic
Ross T. Brady
Brady, Ross T., ‘The non-triviality of dialectical set theory’, in Priest et al. [38], pp. 437–470.
J. Michael Dunn
Dunn, J. Michael, ‘The impossibility of certain higher-order non-classical logics with extensionality’, in Austin [2], pp. 261–280.
Zach Weber (2010)
Weber, Zach, ‘Transfinite Numbers in Paraconsistent Set Theory’, Review of Symbolic Logic, 3(1), 2010.
Graham Priest (1987)
A Study of the TransconsistentContradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent
J. K. Slaney
Slaney, J. K., ‘RWX is not curry-paraconsistent’, in Priest et al. [38], pp. 472–480.
Kurt Gödel (1964)
Gödel, Kurt, ‘What is Cantor’s continuum problem?’, in P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam, (eds.),Philosophy of Mathematics, Cambridge, 1964, pp. 258–273.
J. Dunn (1988)
The Impossibility of Certain Higher-Order Non-Classical Logics with Extensionality
R. Routley, R. Meyer (1976)
Dialectical logic, classical logic, and the consistency of the worldStudies in Soviet Thought, 16
Thomas Jech (1974)
Jech, Thomas, (ed.), Axiomatic Set Theory, American Mathematical Society, 1974.
Paul C. Gilmore
Gilmore, Paul C., ‘The consistency of partial set theory without extensionality’, in Jech [21], pp. 147–153.
J. Dunn (1987)
Relevant predication 1: The formal theoryJournal of Philosophical Logic, 16
Francesco Berto (2008)
Άδύνατον and material exclusionAustralasian Journal of Philosophy, 86
C. Chang (1963)
The Axiom of Comprehension in Infinite Valued Logic.Mathematica Scandinavica, 13
D. Scott (1971)
Axiomatic set theory
K. Gödel (1947)
What is Cantor's Continuum Problem?American Mathematical Monthly, 54
Herman Weyl (1919)
Weyl, Herman, The Continuum, Dover, 1919.
H. Curry (1942)
The inconsistency of certain formal logicsJournal of Symbolic Logic, 7
Graham Priest (2002)
Priest, Graham, ‘Paraconsistent logic’, in Dov M. Gabbay and Franz Günthner, (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd Edition, volume 6, pp. 287–394, Kluwer, 2002.
U. Petersen (2000)
Logic Without Contraction as Based on Inclusion and Unrestricted AbstractionStudia Logica, 64
Thierry Libert (2005)
Models for a paraconsistent set theoryJ. Appl. Log., 3
G. Wilmers (1989)
CANTORIAN SET THEORY AND LIMITATION OF SIZE: (Oxford Logic Guides 10)Bulletin of The London Mathematical Society, 21
Georg Cantor
Cantor, Georg, ‘Letter to Dedekind’, in van Heijenoort [44].
Newton da Costa
da Costa, Newton, ‘Paraconsistent mathematics’, in Batens et al. [3], pp. 165–180.
Philip Kremer (1999)
‘Relevant identityJournal of Philosophical Logic, 28
Graham Priest (2006)
Second expanded edition of [30]Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent
J. Beall, R. Brady, A. Hazen, G. Priest, Greg Restall (2006)
Relevant Restricted QuantificationJournal of Philosophical Logic, 35
R. Meyer, R. Routley, J. Dunn (1979)
Curry's paradoxAnalysis, 39
Chris Mortensen (1995)
Mortensen, Chris, Inconsistent Mathematics, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1995.
Jean van Heijenoort (1931)
Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass
Graham Priest (2008)
Priest, Graham, An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic, Cambridge, 2008. Second edition.
Edwin Mares (2004)
Mares, Edwin, Relevant Logic, Cambridge, 2004.
Conrad Asmus (2009)
Asmus, Conrad, ‘Restricted Arrow’, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 38(4), 2009.
J. Heijenoort (1967)
From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book in Mathematical Logic, 1879-1931
David F. Austin (1988)
Austin, David F., (ed.), Philosophical Analysis, Kluwer, 1988.
Graham Priest (1994)
Priest, Graham, ‘Is arithmetic consistent?’, Mind, 103, 1994,
G. Priest (1987)
In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent
D. Batens (2000)
Batens, D., C. Mortensen, G. Priest, and J.-P. van Bendegem, (eds.), Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.
Abstract The naive set theory problem is to begin with a full comprehension axiom, and to find a logic strong enough to prove theorems, but weak enough not to prove everything. This paper considers the sub-problem of expressing extensional identity and the subset relation in paraconsistent, relevant solutions, in light of a recent proposal from Beall, Brady, Hazen, Priest and Restall [4]. The main result is that the proposal, in the context of an independently motivated formalization of naive set theory, leads to triviality.
"Studia Logica" – Springer Journals
Published: Feb 1, 2010
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get an introductory month for just $19.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.