• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Nuel Belnap
(? - 2024)

Last affiliation: University of Pittsburgh
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    135
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    83

 More details
  • University of Pittsburgh
    Department of Philosophy
    Unknown
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
Areas of Interest
Metaphysics
Logic and Philosophy of Logic
  • All publications (135)
  •  62
    A rule-completeness theorem
    with Richmond H. Thomason
    Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 4 (1): 39-43. 1963.
    Logic and Philosophy of LogicProof TheoryNonclassical Logics
  • Index of reviews by subjects
    Journal of Symbolic Logic 26 (3/4): 149. 1961.
  •  316
    The substitution interpretation of the quantifiers
    with J. Michael Dunn
    Noûs 2 (2): 177-185. 1968.
    Substitutional Quantification
  •  162
    EPR-like “funny business” in the theory of branching space-times
    In Tomasz Placek & Jeremy Butterfield (eds.), Non-locality and Modality, Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 293--315. 2002.
    Time
  • Table of codes
    Journal of Symbolic Logic 26 (3/4): 308. 1961.
  •  137
    Branching space-time analysis of the GHZ theorem
    with László E. Szabó
    Foundations of Physics 26 (8): 989-1002. 1996.
    Greenberger. Horne. Shimony, and Zeilinger gave a new version of the Bell theorem without using inequalities (probabilities). Mermin summarized it concisely; but Bohm and Hiley criticized Mermin's proof from contextualists' point of view. Using the branching space-time language, in this paper a proof will be given that is free of these difficulties. At the same time we will also clarify the limits of the validity of the theorem when it is taken as a proof that quantum mechanics is not compatible…Read more
    Greenberger. Horne. Shimony, and Zeilinger gave a new version of the Bell theorem without using inequalities (probabilities). Mermin summarized it concisely; but Bohm and Hiley criticized Mermin's proof from contextualists' point of view. Using the branching space-time language, in this paper a proof will be given that is free of these difficulties. At the same time we will also clarify the limits of the validity of the theorem when it is taken as a proof that quantum mechanics is not compatible with a deterministic world nor with a world that permits correlated space-related events without a common cause.
    Space and Time
  •  63
    Restricted quantification and conditional assertion
    In Hugues Leblanc (ed.), Truth, Syntax, and Modality: Proceedings Of The Temple University Conference On Alternative Semantlcs, North-holland Publishing Company. 1973.
    SemanticsLogical Expressions
  •  123
    A Decision Procedure For the System E Ī of Entailment with Negation
    with John R. Wallace
    Mathematical Logic Quarterly 11 (4): 277-289. 1965.
    Nonclassical Logics
  •  82
    Notes on the
    Permission is hereby granted until the end of December, 2009 to make single copies of this document as desired, and to make multiple copies for use by teachers or students in any course offered by any school.
    British Philosophy
  •  156
    Questions, answers, and presuppositions
    Journal of Philosophy 63 (20): 609-611. 1966.
    PresuppositionSpeech ActsAssertionErotetic LogicQuestions
  •  35
    Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, Vol. II
    with Alan Ross Anderson and J. Michael Dunn
    Princeton University Press. 1992.
    Relevance LogicTruth, Misc
  •  90
    Leblanc Hugues and Hailperin Theodore. Nondesignating singular terms. The philosophical review, vol. 68, pp. 239–243
    Journal of Symbolic Logic 25 (1): 87-88. 1960.
  •  1
    Proof tableau formulations of some first-order relevant ortho-logics
    with Michael Mcrobbie
    Bulletin of the Section of Logic 13 (4): 233-239. 1984.
    In [6] proof tableau formulations were given of the implication/negation fragments of the important zero-order relevant logics E and R and the semirelevant logic RM . The main purpose of this paper then, is to extend results by giving proof tableau formulations of the distribution-free fragments of E, R and RM and of their first order extensions EQ, RQ and RMQ. Where X is one of these logics, we shall follow [13] in calling its distribution-free fragment OX – the ‘O’ standing for ‘ortho’ which is…Read more
    In [6] proof tableau formulations were given of the implication/negation fragments of the important zero-order relevant logics E and R and the semirelevant logic RM . The main purpose of this paper then, is to extend results by giving proof tableau formulations of the distribution-free fragments of E, R and RM and of their first order extensions EQ, RQ and RMQ. Where X is one of these logics, we shall follow [13] in calling its distribution-free fragment OX – the ‘O’ standing for ‘ortho’ which is meant to signify the kinship of these logics to quantum logics or ortho-logics as they now tend to be known. Hence in what follows we shall refer to the logics OX simply as relevant ortho-logics
  •  247
    Gupta's rule of revision theory of truth
    Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (1): 103-116. 1982.
    Gupta’s Rule of Revision theory of truth builds on insights to be found in Martin and Woodruff and Kripke in order to permanently deepen our understanding of truth, of paradox, and of how we work our language while our language is working us. His concept of a predicate deriving its meaning by way of a Rule of Revision ought to impact significantly on the philosophy of language. Still, fortunately, he has left me something to.
    Theories of Truth, MiscLiar ParadoxRevision Theory of Truth
  •  225
    Under Carnap’s Lamp: Flat Pre-semantics
    Studia Logica 80 (1): 1-28. 2005.
    “Flat pre-semantics” lets each parameter of truth (etc.) be considered sepa-rately and equally, and without worrying about grammatical complications. This allows one to become a little clearer on a variety of philosophical-logical points, such as the use fulness of Carnapian tolerance and the deep relativity of truth. A more definite result of thinking in terms of flat pre-semantics lies in the articulation of some instructive ways of categorizing operations on meanings in purely logical terms i…Read more
    “Flat pre-semantics” lets each parameter of truth (etc.) be considered sepa-rately and equally, and without worrying about grammatical complications. This allows one to become a little clearer on a variety of philosophical-logical points, such as the use fulness of Carnapian tolerance and the deep relativity of truth. A more definite result of thinking in terms of flat pre-semantics lies in the articulation of some instructive ways of categorizing operations on meanings in purely logical terms in relation to various parame- ters of truth (etc.); namely, closing vs. leaving open, local vs. translocal, and anchored vs. unanchored. Basic relations among these categories are established.
    Logic and Philosophy of LogicLogicsAnalyticity, MiscMeaning, MiscCharacter and ContentSemantic Value…Read more
    Logic and Philosophy of LogicLogicsAnalyticity, MiscMeaning, MiscCharacter and ContentSemantic Values
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback