On Some Kripke Complete and Kripke Incomplete Intermediate Predicate Logics

The Kripke-completeness and incompleteness of some intermediate predicate logics is established. In particular, we obtain a Kripke-incomplete logic (H* +A+D+K) where H* is the intuitionistic predicate calculus, A is a disjunction-free propositional formula, D = x(P(x) V Q) xP(x) V Q, K = ¬¬x(P(x) V ¬P(x)) (the negative answer to a question of T. Shimura).     

Kripke and materialism

Philosophical Studies -     

Generalized Kripke Frames

Algebraic work [9] shows that the deep theory of possible world semantics is available in the more general setting of substructural logics, at least in an algebraic guise. The question is whether it is also available in a relational form.This article seeks to set the stage for answering this question. Guided by the algebraic theory, but purely relationally we introduce a new type of frames. These structures generalize Kripke structures but are two-sorted, containing both worlds and co-worlds. These latter points may be viewed as modelling irreducible increases in information where worlds model irreducible decreases in information. Based on these structures, a purely model theoretic and uniform account of completeness for the implication-fusion fragment of various substructural logics is given. Completeness is obtained via a generalization of the standard canonical model construction in combination with correspondence results.The author’s research was partially supported by grant NSF01-4-21760 of the USA National Science Foundation as well as by a grant from the Carlsberg Foundation.Special Issue Ways of Worlds II. On Possible Worlds and Related Notions Edited by Vincent F. Hendricks and Stig Andur Pedersen     

Kripke bundles for intermediate predicate logics and Kripke frames for intuitionistic modal logics

Shehtman and Skvortsov introduced Kripke bundles as semantics of non-classical first-order predicate logics. We show the structural equivalence between Kripke bundles for intermediate predicate logics and Kripke-type frames for intuitionistic modal prepositional logics. This equivalence enables us to develop the semantical study of relations between intermediate predicate logics and intuitionistic modal propositional logics. New examples of modal counterparts of intermediate predicate logics are given.The author would like to express his gratitude to Professor Hiroakira Ono for his comments, and to Professor Tadashi Kuroda for his encouragement.The author wishes to express his gratitude to Professors V. B. Shehtman, D. P. Skvortsov and M. Takano for their comments.     

Kripke on functionalism and automata

Saul Kripke has proposed an argument to show that there is a serious problem with many computational accounts of physical systems and with functionalist theories in the philosophy of mind. The problem with computational accounts is roughly that they provide no noncircular way to maintain that any particular function with an infinite domain is realized by any physical system, and functionalism has the similar problem because of the character of the functional systems that are supposed to be realized by organisms. This paper shows that the standard account of what it is for a physical system to compute a function can avoid Kripke's criticisms without being reduced to circularity; a very minor and natural elaboration of the standard account suffices to save both functionalist theories and computational accounts generally.I am indebted to Saul Kripke for several helpful discussions of this material. I also benefitted from the discussions following the presentations of earlier versions of this paper at the University of Pennsylvania (February, 1984), UCLA (June, 1984), and Rutgers University (December, 1984), and particularly from my discussions with Elizabeth Spelke and Scott Weinstein.     

Kripke Incomplete Logics Containing KTB

It is shown that there is a Kripke incomplete logic in NExt(KTB ⊕ □² p → □³ p). Furthermore, it is also shown that there exists a continuum of Kripke incomplete logics in NExt(KTB ⊕ □⁵ p → □⁶ p). Presented by Michael Zakharyaschev