Jean-Yves Beziau

Im Folgenden stellen wir drei aktuelle Forschungsbereiche zur formalen Logik bei Kant allgemeinverständlich dar und greifen dabei auf die trans zendentale Logik nur dann zurück, wenn sie ein besseres Verständnis der formalen Logik ermöglicht: Zunächst wird Kants Beitrag zur Rezeption und Weiterentwicklung von Euler-artigen Diagrammen dargestellt. Diese Diagramme wurden in den 1990er Jahren wiederentdeckt, als formales System interpretiert und werden heute insbes. in der Didaktik, in den Kognitionswissenschaften, in der Linguistik, in KI-Bereichen wie der (Logik-basierten) Wissensrepräsentation eingesetzt, und auch in der Philosophie verwendet (Kapitel 2). Mehrere Studien haben in den letzten Jahren gezeigt, dass Kant in weiten Teilen seines Systems Oppositionsverhältnisse verwendet, die der Struktur des logischen Quadrats entsprechen. Das logische Quadrat ist heute Gegenstand intensiver Forschung, da es neben der klassischen, auch die paravollständige und parakonsistente Negation abbildet (Kap. 3). Jüngst wurde zudem die Implementierbarkeit der kantischen Logik in ein formalisiertes deduktives System bewiesen. Die Bedeutung dieses Ergebnisses wird insbesondere im Hinblick auf die formalisierte Umsetzung der Sätze vom Widerspruch, vom zureichenden Grund und der Ausschließung des Mittleren erläutert (Kap. 4). Abschließend möchten wir ein paar Perspektiven für die Forschung zur formalen Logik bei Kant nennen (Kap. 5). -- Note: No financial support acknowledged by the second autor (S. Kovač).

Universal Logic is not a new logic, but a general theory of logics, considered as mathematical structures. The name was introduced about ten years ago, but the subject is as old as the beginning of modern logic: Alfred Tarski and other Polish logicians such as Adolf Lindenbaum developed a general theory of logics at the end of the 1920s based on consequence operations and logical matrices. The subject was revived after the flowering of thousands of new logics during the last thirty years: there was a need for a systematic theory of logics to put some order in this chaotic multiplicity. This book contains recent works on universal logic by first-class researchers from all around the world. The book is full of new and challenging ideas that will guide the future of this exciting subject. It will be of interest for people who want to better understand what logic is. Tools and concepts are provided here for those who want to study classes of already existing logics or want to design and build new ones

Universal logic is to logic what universal algebra is to algebra. It is not a specific system of logic that would apply to everything but a general theory of all existing and possible logics. This new field has been slowly emerging through the new directions of research in logic of the past decades and the name was coined 15 years ago. In the Spring of 2005 was organized in Montreux, Switzerland, the First World Congress on Universal Logic. This exciting event gathered more than 200 people from about 40 different countries. Many famous logicians were present there, such as Dov Gabbay, Krister Segerberg, Saul Kripke, Michael Dunn, Jouko Väännänen. Most of the papers in this book arose from talks - and discussions that follow - presented during this event. They are concerned with philosophical and historical approaches discussing the basic concepts of logic and reflecting the meaning of a universal approach to logic, the development and elaboration of general tools in order to construct frameworks useful for studying classes of logics, applications of logics to concrete problems through the universal perspective.

In this paper we address some central problems of combination of logics through the study of a very simple but highly informative case, the combination of the logics of disjunction and conjunction. At first it seems that it would be very easy to combine such logics, but the following problem arises: if we combine these logics in a straightforward way, distributivity holds. On the other hand, distributivity does not arise if we use the usual notion of extension between consequence relations. A detailed discussion about this phenomenon, as well as some elucidation for it, is given

After explaining the interdisciplinary aspect of the series of events organized around the square of opposition since 2007, we discuss papers related to the 4th World Congress on the Square of Opposition which was organized in the Vatican at the Pontifical Lateran University in 2014. We distinguish three categories of work: those dealing with the evolution and development of the theory of opposition, those using the square as a metalogical tool to give a better understanding of various systems of logic and those related with applications of the theory of opposition to conceptual analysis and pedagogy.

In this paper we discuss the recent developments of logic and explain what can be done to promote a bright future for logic. After comments on the contest The Future of Logic that took place during the 5th UNILOG in Istanbul in 2015, we give a general idea of how logic can be practiced and understood, emphasizing in particular the distinction between logic as reasoning and logic as the science of reasoning. And we discuss some projects we have launched: the book series Logic PhDs, series of events such as UNILOG, SQUARE and LIQ, the Logic Prizes Contest and the World Logic Day.

The theory of the square of opposition has been studied for over 2,000 years and has seen a resurgence in new theories and research since the second half of the twentieth century. This volume collects papers presented at the Sixth World Congress on the Square of Opposition, held in Crete in 2018, developing an interdisciplinary exploration of the theory. Chapter authors explore subjects such as Aristotle’s ontological square, logical oppositions in Avicenna’s hypothetical logic, and the power of the square of opposition to solve theological problems regarding predestination and theodicy. Other topics covered include: Hegel’s opposition to diagrams De Morgan’s unpublished octagon of opposition turnstile figures of opposition institutional model-theoretic treatment of oppositions Lacan’s four formulas of sexuation the theory of oppositional poly-simplexes The Exoteric Square of Opposition will appeal to pure logicians, historians of logic, semioticians, philosophers, theologians, mathematicians, and psychoanalysts.

We first start by clarifying what axiomatizing everything can mean. We then study a famous case of axiomatization, the axiomatization of natural numbers, where two different aspects of axiomatization show up, the model-theoretical one and the proof-theoretical one. After that we discuss a case of axiomatization in a sense opposed to the one of arithmetic, the axiomatization of the notion of order, where the idea is not to catch a specific structure, but a notion. A third mathematical case is then examined, the one of identity, a simple and obvious notion, but that cannot be axiomatized in first-order logic. We then move on to more general notions: the axiomatization of causality and the universe. To end with we deal with an even more tricky question: the axiomatization of reasoning itself. In conclusion we discuss in the light of our investigations the relation between axiomatization and understanding.

This paper introduces the special issue on Logic and Religion of the journal Logica Universalis (Springer). The issue contains the following articles: Logic and Religion, by Jean-Yves Beziau and Ricardo Silvestre; Thinking Negation in Early Hinduism and Classical Indian Philosophy, by Purushottama Bilimoria; Karma Theory, Determinism, Fatalism and Freedom of Will, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre; From Logic in Islam to Islamic Logic, by Musa Akrami; Leibniz’s Ontological Proof of the Existence of God and the Problem of Impossible Objects, by Wolfgang Lenzen; A Logical Analysis of the Anselm’s Unum Argumentum (from Proslogion), by Jean-Pierre Desclés; Monotonic and Non-monotonic Embeddings of Anselm’s Proof, by Jacob Archambault; Computer-Assisted Analysis of the Anderson–Hájek Ontological Controversy, by C. Benzmüller, L. Weber and B. Woltzenlogel Paleo.

This special issue of Logica Universalis (Springer) deals with the relations between logic and religion, broadly conceived. It contains the following articles: Logic and Religion, by Jean-Yves Beziau and Ricardo Silvestre; Thinking Negation in Early Hinduism and Classical Indian Philosophy, by Purushottama Bilimoria; Karma Theory, Determinism, Fatalism and Freedom of Will, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre; From Logic in Islam to Islamic Logic, by Musa Akrami; Leibniz’s Ontological Proof of the Existence of God and the Problem of Impossible Objects, by Wolfgang Lenzen; A Logical Analysis of the Anselm’s Unum Argumentum (from Proslogion), by Jean-Pierre Desclés; Monotonic and Non-monotonic Embeddings of Anselm’s Proof, by Jacob Archambault; Computer-Assisted Analysis of the Anderson–Hájek Ontological Controversy, by C. Benzmüller, L. Weber and B. Woltzenlogel Paleo.

This volume deals with the relation between faith and reason, and brings the latest developments of modern logic into the scene. Faith and rationality are two perennial key concepts in the history of ideas. Philosophers and theologians have struggled to bring into harmony these otherwise conflicting concepts. Despite the diversity of approaches about what rationality effectively means, logic remains the cannon of objective and rational thought. The chapters in this volume analyze several issues pertaining to the philosophy of religion and philosophical theology from the perspective of their relation to logic and the benefit they can derive from the use of modern logic tools. The book is divided into five parts: (I) Introduction, (II) Analytic Philosophy of Religion, (III) Logical Philosophy of Religion, (IV) Computational Philosophy and Religion and (V) Logic, Language and Religion. This text appeals to students and researchers in the field.

We discuss a theory presented in a posthumous paper by Alfred Tarski entitled “What are logical notions?”. Although the theory of these logical notions is something outside of the main stream of logic, not presented in logic textbooks, it is a very interesting theory and can easily be understood by anybody, especially studying the simplest case of the four basic logical notions. This is what we are doing here, as well as introducing a challenging fifth logical notion. We first recall the context and origin of what are here called Tarski-Lindenbaum logical notions. In the second part, we present these notions in the simple case of a binary relation. In the third part, we examine in which sense these are considered as logical notions contrasting them with an example of a nonlogical relation. In the fourth part, we discuss the formulations of the four logical notions in natural language and in first-order logic without equality, emphasizing the fact that two of the four logical notions cannot be expressed in this formal language. In the fifth part, we discuss the relations between these notions using the theory of the square of opposition. In the sixth part, we introduce the notion of variety corresponding to all non-logical notions and we argue that it can be considered as a logical notion because it is invariant, always referring to the same class of structures. In the seventh part, we present an enigma: is variety formalizable in first-order logic without equality? There follow recollections concerning Jan Woleński. This paper is dedicated to his 80th birthday. We end with the bibliography, giving some precise references for those wanting to know more about the topic.

We study here equiformity, the standard identity criterion for sentences. This notion was put forward by Lesniewski, mentioned by Tarski and defined explicitly by Presburger. At the practical level this criterion seems workable but if the notion of sentence is taken as a fundamental basis for logic and mathematics, it seems that this principle cannot be maintained without vicious circle. It seems also that equiformity has some semantical features ; maybe this is not so clear for individual signs but sentences are often considered as meaningful combinations of signs. If meaning has to play a role, we are thus maybe in no better position than when dealing with identity criterion for propositions. In formal logic, one speaks rather about well-formed formulas, but closed formulas are called sentences because they are meaningful in the sense that they can be true or false. Formulas look better like mathematical objects than material inscriptions and equiformity does not seem to apply to them. Various congruencies can be considered as identities between formulas and in particular "to have the same logical form". One can say that the objects of study of logic are rather logical forms than sentences conceived as material inscriptions.

This paper introduces the special issue on Logic and Philosophy of Religion of the journal Sophia: International Journal of Philosophy and Traditions (Springer). The issue contains the following articles: Logic and Philosophy of Religion, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre and Jean-Yvez Béziau; The End of Eternity, by Jamie Carlin Watson; The Vagueness of the Muse—The Logic of Peirce’s Humble Argument for the Reality of God, by Cassiano Terra Rodrigues; Misunderstanding the Talk(s) of the Divine: Theodicy in the Wittgensteinian Tradition, by Ondřej Beran; On the Concept of Theodicy, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre; The Logical Problem of the Trinity and the Strong Theory of Relative Identity, by Daniel Molto; Thomas Aquinas on Logic, Being, and Power, and Contemporary Problems for Divine Omnipotence, by Errin D. Clark.

This paper introduces the special issue on Formal Approaches to the Ontological Argument of the Journal of Applied Logics (College Publications). The issue contains the following articles: Formal Approaches to the Ontological Argument, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre and Jean-Yves Béziau; A Brief Critical Introduction to the Ontological Argument and its Formalization: Anselm, Gaunilo, Descartes, Leibniz and Kant, by Ricardo Sousa Silvestre; A Mechanically Assisted Examination of Begging the Question in Anselm’s Ontological Argument, by John Rushby; A Tractarian Resolution to the Ontological Argument, by Erik Thomsen; On Kant’s Hidden Ambivalence Toward Existential Generalization in his Critique of the Ontological Argument, by Giovanni Mion; The Totality of Predicates and the Possibility of the Most Real Being, by Srećko Kovač; An Even More Leibnizian Version of Gödel’s Ontological Argument, by Kordula Świętorzecka and Marcin Łyczak; A Case Study On Computational Hermeneutics: E. J. Lowe’s Modal Ontological Argument, by David Fuenmayor.