制约逻辑与相干逻辑比较研究  

Contrast between Lin's Entailment Logic and Relevance Logic

作　　者：胡红[1] 盛作国[1] 

机构地区：[1]贵州大学人文学院,贵州贵阳550025

出　　处：《毕节学院学报（综合版）》2008年第1期52-56,共5页Journal of Bijie University

摘　　要：实质蕴涵的提出引起学界极大争议,蕴涵怪论一直是争论焦点之一。20世纪以来不少学者致力于构造排除蕴涵怪论的形式系统。制约逻辑和相干逻辑均成功避免了迄今所知的一切蕴涵怪论。因制约逻辑系统、模态逻辑系统以及与严格蕴涵、相干蕴涵相联系的E系统都采用entailment这个词来表征,故易被误认作相近的系统。事实上,制约关系与相干蕴涵不同;制约逻辑接纳而相干逻辑排斥选言推理,故此二者殊异。认为制约逻辑与相干逻辑等价,是一种误解。The naissance of material implication greatly produced many controversies, and the paradoxes of implication have always been the focus of those arguments. Since 1900s, many logicians applied themselves to construct formal systems in which paradoxes of implication may not be included. Both Lin＇s Entailment Logic, LEL for short, and relevance logic excluded all paradoxes of implication those we found so far. Entailment, as a token of logic, was adopted by Lin＇s entailment systems, modal systems, and entailment system, E for short, which linked with strict implication and relevant implication. Hence these systems above are easily mistaken for the similar. In fact, Ling entailment is different from relevant implication. LEL include the disjunctive inference but the relevance logic not, and therefore they are disparate or dissimilar systems.

关 键 词：蕴涵怪论 制约逻辑 两个独立性 相干逻辑 选言推理 

分 类 号：B81[哲学宗教—逻辑学]