Jean-Yves Beziau

This paper is an attempt to clear some philosophical questions about the nature of logic by setting up a mathematical framework. The notion of congruence in logic is defined. A logical structure in which there is no non-trivial congruence relation, like some paraconsistent logics, is called simple. The relations between simplicity, the replacement theorem and algebraization of logic are studied (including MacLane-Curry’s theorem and a discussion about Curry’s algebras). We also examine how these concepts are related to such notions as semantics, truth-functionality and bivalence. We argue that a logic, which is simple, can deserve the name logic and that the opposite view is connected with a reductionist perspective (reduction of logic to algebra)

In this paper several systems of modal logic based on four-valued matrices are presented. We start with pure modal logics, i.e. modal logics with modal operators as the only operators, using the Polish framework of structural consequence relation. We show that with a four-valued matrix we can define modal operators which have the same behavior as in pure S5 (S5 with only modal operators). We then present modal logics with conjunction and disjunction based on four-valued matrices. We show that if we use partial order instead of linear order, we are avoiding Lukasiewicz's paradox. We then introduce classical negation and we show than defining implication in the usual way using negation and disjunction Kripke law is valid using either linear or partial order. On the other hand we show that the difference between linear and partial order appears at the level of the excluded middle and the replacement theorem. © 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

The hexagon of opposition is an improvement of the square of opposition due to Robert Blanché. After a short presentation of the square and its various interpretations, we discuss two important problems related with the square: the problem of the I-corner and the problem of the O-corner. The meaning of the notion described by the I-corner does not correspond to the name used for it. In the case of the O-corner, the problem is not a wrong-name problem but a no-name problem and it is not clear what is the intuitive notion corresponding to it. We explain then that the triangle of contrariety proposed by different people such as Vasiliev and Jespersen solves these problems, but that we don’t need to reject the square. It can be reconstructed from this triangle of contrariety, by considering a dual triangle of subcontrariety. This is the main idea of Blanché’s hexagon. We then give different examples of hexagons to show how this framework can be useful to conceptual analysis in many different fields such as economy, music, semiotics, identity theory, philosophy, metalogic and the metatheory of the hexagon itself. We finish by discussing the abstract structure of the hexagon and by showing how we can swing from sense to non-sense thinking with the hexagon.

After recalling the distinction between logic as reasoning and logic as theory of reasoning, we first examine the question of relativity of logic arguing that the theory of reasoning as any other science is relative. In a second part we discuss the emergence of universal logic as a general theory of logical systems, making comparison with universal algebra and the project of mathesis universalis. In a third part we critically present three lines of research connected to universal logic: logical pluralism, non-classical logics and cognitive science.