Conrad Asmus

Can one be a non-dialetheic paraconsistentist? I will show that on a standard model-theoretic approach to consequence the answer to this question depends on the philosophical motivation behind the models. If the models are interpretations of the formal language, the answer to the question is "No", but if the models are representations of how things are, the answer is less clear. That different approaches to semantic characterisations of consequence come apart in this way demonstrates that attention should be paid, especially by paraconsistentists, to the motivations behind the theories. © 2012 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

In this paper I present a range of substructural logics for a conditional connective ↦. This connective was original introduced semantically via restriction on the ternary accessibility relation R for a relevant conditional. I give sound and complete proof systems for a number of variations of this semantic definition. The completeness result in this paper proceeds by step-by-step improvements of models, rather than by the one-step canonical model method. This gradual technique allows for the additional control, lacking in the canonical model method, that is required.

Theories of truth and vagueness are closely connected; in this article, I draw another connection between these areas of research. Gupta and Belnap’s Revision Theory of Truth is converted into an approach to vagueness. I show how revision sequences from a general theory of definitions can be used to understand the nature of vague predicates. The revision sequences show how the meaning of vague predicates are interconnected with each other. The approach is contrasted with the similar supervaluationist approach.