José M. Méndez

The concept of constructive negation we refer to in this paper is (minimally) intuitionistic in character (see [1]). The idea is to understand the negation of a proposition A as equivalent to A implying a falsity constant of some sort. Then, negation is introduced either by means of this falsity constant or, as in this paper, by means of a propositional connective defined with the constant. But, unlike intuitionisitc logic, the type of negation we develop here is, of course, devoid of paradoxes of relevance.

As is known, a logic S is paraconsistent if the rule ECQ (E contradictione quodlibet) is not a rule of S. Not less well known is the fact that Lewis’ modal logics are not paraconsistent. Actually, Lewis vindicates the validity of ECQ in a famous proof currently known as the “Lewis’ proof” or “Lewis’ argument.” This proof essentially leans on the Disjunctive Syllogism as a rule of inference. The aim of this paper is to define a series of paraconsistent logics included in S4 where the Disjunctive Syllogism is valid only as a rule of proof.

Entendemos el concepto de “negación mínima” en el sentido clásico definido por Johansson. El propósito de este artículo es definir la lógica positiva mínima Bp+, y probar que la negación mínima puede introducirse en ella. Además, comentaremos algunas de las múltiples extensiones negativas de Bp+.“Minimal negation” is classically understood in a Johansson sense. The aim of this paper is to define the minimal positive logic Bp+ and prove that a minimal negation can be inroduced in it. In addition, some of the many possible negation extensions of Bp+ are commented