Abstract
I am not a Relevantist. But, were I one, I might speak something like this. βIn their epochal work Entailment (vol. I, Anderson and Belnap, 1975, with others), Relevant Logicians have led us out of the Material dominions of the great Boole. They wave the Archetypal Form of Inference A β A, and the Truth-functional Sea parts, that the Children of Relevance might reach the far side in safety, there to practice Natural Deduction according to the systems of their choice in peace, tranquility, and mathematical exactitude. But the Sea returns to claim the pursuing Official Logicians, who are weighed down by false theorems. Just is the fate of these Officials. For they have bowed down before Irrelevant Entailments in which antecedents and consequents share no variable. And they have allowed the Accidental Premiss to beget the Necessitive Conclusion. Drowned are they in their own Paradoxes and Contradictions; and in the Flood of Nonsense that follows therefrom.β
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ackermann, W., 1956, BegrΓΌndung einer strengenβ Implikation, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 21:113β128.
Anderson, A. R. and Belnap, N. D. Jr., 1962, The Pure Calculus of Entailment, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 27:19β52.
Anderson, A. R. and Belnap, N. D. Jr., 1975, βEntailment, the Logic of Relevance and Necessity,β vol. 1, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Bacon, J., 1966, βBeing and Existence: Two Ways of Formal Ontology,β Ph.D. thesis, Yale University, New Haven.
Belnap, N. D. Jr., 1959, βThe Formalization of Entailment,β Ph.D. thesis, Yale University, New Haven.
Belnap, N. D. Jr., 1967, Intensional Models for First Degree Formulas, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 32:1β22.
Belnap, N. D. Jr., 1984, Return to Relevance, typescript, Pittsburgh.
Belnap, N. D. Jr. and Dunn, J. M., 1981, Entailment and the Disjunctive Syllogism, in: βContemporary Philosophy: A New Survey,β G. Floistad and G. H. von Wright, eds., Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.
Brady, R. T., 1982, Non-Triviality of Dialectical Set Theory, in: βParaconsistent Logic,β R. Routley, G. Priest and J. Norman, eds., Philosophia Verlag, Munich (forthcoming).
Church, A., 1951, The Weak Theory of Implication, in: βKontrolliertes Denken, Untersuchungen zum LogikkalkΓΌl und der Logik der Einzelwissenschaften,β A. Menne, A. Wilhelmy, and H. Angstl, eds., Alber, Munich.
Coffa, J. A., 1975, Fallacies of Modality, in: βEntailment, the Logic of Relevance and Necessity,β A. R. Anderson and N. D. Belnap Jr., eds., Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Curry, H. B. and Feys, R., 1958, βCombinatory Logic,β vol. 1, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Dunn, J. M., 1966, βThe Algebra of Intensional Logics,β Ph.D. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Ann Arbor.
Kripke, S. A., The Problem of Entailment, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 24:324.
Maximova, L., 1973, Semantics for the Calculus E of Entailment, Bulletin of the Section of Logic, Polish Academy of Sciences, 2:18β21.
Martin, E. P., 1978, βThe P-W Problem,β Ph.D. thesis, Australian National University, Canberra.
McRobbie, M. A., 1979, βA Proof Theoretic Investigation of Relevant and Modal Logics,β Ph.D. thesis, Australian National University, Canberra.
Meyer, R. K., 1975, Arithmetic Formulated Relevantly, typescript, Australian National University, Canberra.
Meyer, R. K., 1979, Why I am Not a Relevantist, Research Paper No. 1, Logic Group, Australian National University, Canberra.
Meyer, R. K. and Dunn, J. M., 1969, E, R and Ξ³, Journal of Symbolic Logic, 34:460β474.
Meyer, R. K. and Martin, E. P., 1984, Logic on the Australian Plan, typescript, Australian National University, Canberra.
Meyer, R. K. and McRobbie, M. A., 1982, Multisets and Relevant Implication I and II, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 60:107β139, 265-281.
Meyer, R. K. and Routley, R., 1973, Classical Relevant Logics I, Studia Logica, 32:51β66.
Mortensen, C., 1983, The Validity of Disjunctive Syllogism is Not So Easily Proved, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 24:35β40.
Routley, R., 1983, Relevantism and the Problem as to When Material Detachment and the Disjunctive Syllogism Argument Can be Correctly Used, Research Paper No. 12, Logic Group, Australian National University, Canberra.
Routley, R., and Meyer, R. K., 1973, The Semantics of Entailment I, in: βTruth, Syntax and Modality,β H. Leblanc, ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Routley, R. and Routley, V., 1969, A Fallacy of Modality, Nous, 3:129β153.
Routley, R. and Routley, V., 1972, Semantics of First Degree Entailment, Nous, 6:335β359.
Routley, R. with Meyer, R. K., Plumwood, V. and Brady, R. T., 1984, βRelevant Logics and Their Rivals, Part 1: the Basic Philosophical and Semantical Theory,β Ridgeview, Atascadero, California.
Slaney, J. K., 1982, The Irrationality of the Square Root of 2, typescript, University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Thistlewaite, P. B., 1984, βAutomated Theorem-Proving in Non-Classical Logics,β Ph.D. thesis, Australian National University, Canberra.
Urquhart, A., 1972, βThe Semantics of Entailment,β Ph.D. thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Ann Arbor.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
Β© 1985 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Meyer, R.K. (1985). A Farewell to Entailment. In: Dorn, G., Weingartner, P. (eds) Foundations of Logic and Linguistics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0548-2_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0548-2_25
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4899-0550-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4899-0548-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive