Showing 1–2 of 2 results for author: Ford, B

Reasoning Around Paradox with Grounded Deduction

Authors: Bryan Ford

Abstract: How can we reason around logical paradoxes without falling into them? This paper introduces grounded deduction or GD, a Kripke-inspired approach to first-order logic and arithmetic that is neither classical nor intuitionistic, but nevertheless appears both pragmatically usable and intuitively justifiable. GD permits the direct expression of unrestricted recursive definitions -- including paradoxic… ▽ More How can we reason around logical paradoxes without falling into them? This paper introduces grounded deduction or GD, a Kripke-inspired approach to first-order logic and arithmetic that is neither classical nor intuitionistic, but nevertheless appears both pragmatically usable and intuitively justifiable. GD permits the direct expression of unrestricted recursive definitions -- including paradoxical ones such as 'L := not L' -- while adding dynamic typing premises to certain inference rules so that such paradoxes do not lead to inconsistency. This paper constitutes a preliminary development and investigation of grounded deduction, to be extended with further elaboration and deeper analysis of its intriguing properties. △ Less

Submitted 3 April, 2025; v1 submitted 12 September, 2024; originally announced September 2024.

MSC Class: 03B60 ACM Class: F.4.1

On the Use of Impredicative Reasoning to Construct a Class of Partial Models of ZF Within ZF [Withdrawn]

Authors: Bryan Ford

Abstract: This paper has been withdrawn due to a critical error discovered in Theorem 4.21. Anyone with a historical or pragamatic interest in prior "negative results", however - e.g., failed proof attempts relating to the (in)consistency of ZF or the soundness of impredicative reasoning - is welcome to retrieve the original version of the paper still avaailable here on arXiv. This paper has been withdrawn due to a critical error discovered in Theorem 4.21. Anyone with a historical or pragamatic interest in prior "negative results", however - e.g., failed proof attempts relating to the (in)consistency of ZF or the soundness of impredicative reasoning - is welcome to retrieve the original version of the paper still avaailable here on arXiv. △ Less

Submitted 6 May, 2004; v1 submitted 27 April, 2004; originally announced April 2004.

Comments: 22 pages

MSC Class: 03E35