Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A logic whose validities are recursively enumerable satis... — Carmelics
    Home/Truth & Knowledge
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The logic XL is complete in an abstract sense

    A logic whose validities are recursively enumerable satisfies abstract completeness

    Proof of definition segmentsTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Truth & KnowledgeProof of definition segments

    Related

    The logic XL is complete in an abstract senseThe set of validities of XL is recursively enumerable

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Truth & Knowledge
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Without completeness, there exist semantic consequences that cannot be...85%XL has recursive enumerability of validities85%The logic XL is complete in an abstract sense85%The set of validities of XL is recursively enumerable85%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: logic-many-sorted
    View source passageHide passage
    Namely, the set of validities of \(\XL\) is recursively enumerable. Therefore, \(\XL\) is complete in an abstract sense. Remark: So, we learn that a calculus for \(\XL\) is a natural demand, but we also learn that in MSL we can simulate such a calculus and then we could use a theorem prover for MSL. 5 Level Two: the Main Theorem When the \(\XL\) logic under scrutiny has a concept of logical consequence, we may try to prove the Main theorem; that is, that consequence in \(\XL\) (\(\Pi \models _

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective