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
    If A contains no disjunction (∨) or existential quantifie... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→For any negative formula A (without disjunction or existential quantifier), double negation elimination holds intuitionistically

    If A contains no disjunction (∨) or existential quantifier (∃), then ¬¬A → A is provable in intuitionistic logic

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & 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

    Philosophy of LanguageTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    For any negative formula A (without disjunction or existential quantifier), doub...

    Similar

    By intuitionistic logic and the decidability of quantifier-free arithm...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    82%
    The quantifier W counts as a logical constant if and only if the exist...79%
    F does not prove the existential statement ∃x Prf_F(x, ⌜G_F⌝)79%
    Every proposition has existential import in Bolzano's logic79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: logic-intuitionistic
    View source passageHide passage
    This is important because Brouwer’s intuitionistic analysis is inconsistent with LEM. However, if \(A\) is any negative formula (without \(\vee\) or \(\exists\)) then \(\neg \neg A \rightarrow A\) is provable using intuitionistic logic. A reconciliation of intuitionistic and classical analysis along these lines, inspired by Troelstra [1977] and Kripke[2019], is suggested in Moschovakis [2017].

    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