This book is the first in the field of paraconsistency to offer a comprehensive overview of the subject, including connections to other logics and applications in information processing, linguistics, reasoning and argumentation, and philosophy of science. It is recommended reading for anyone interested in the question of reasoning and argumentation in the presence of contradictions, in semantics, in the paradoxes of set theory and in the puzzling properties of negation in logic programming. Paraconsistent logic comprises a major logical theory and (...) offers the broadest possible perspective on the debate of negation in logic and philosophy. It is a powerful tool for reasoning under contradictoriness as it investigates logic systems in which contradictory information does not lead to arbitrary conclusions. Reasoning under contradictions constitutes one of most important and creative achievements in contemporary logic, with deep roots in philosophical questions involving negation and consistency This book offers an invaluable introduction to a topic of central importance in logic and philosophy. It discusses the history of paraconsistent logic; language, negation, contradiction, consistency and inconsistency; logics of formal inconsistency and the main paraconsistent propositional systems; many-valued companions, possible-translations semantics and non-deterministic semantics; paraconsistent modal logics; first-order paraconsistent logics; applications to information processing, databases and quantum computation; and applications to deontic paradoxes, connections to Eastern thought and to dialogical reasoning. (shrink)

In abstract algebraic logic, many systems, such as those paraconsistent logics taking inspiration from da Costa's hierarchy, are not algebraizable by even the broadest standard methodologies, as that of Blok and Pigozzi. However, these logics can be semantically characterized by means of non-deterministic algebraic structures such as Nmatrices, RNmatrices and swap structures. These structures are based on multialgebras, which generalize algebras by allowing the result of an operation to assume a non-empty set of values. This leads to an interest in (...) exploring the foundations of multialgebras applied to the study of logic systems. It is well known from universal algebra that, for every signature \, there exist algebras over \ which are absolutely free, meaning that they do not satisfy any identities or, alternatively, satisfy the universal mapping property for the class of \-algebras. Furthermore, once we fix a cardinality of the generating set, they are, up to isomorphisms, unique, and equal to algebras of terms. Equivalently, the forgetful functor, from the category of \-algebras to Set, has a left adjoint. This result does not extend to multialgebras. Not only multialgebras satisfying the universal mapping property do not exist, but the forgetful functor \, from the category of \-multialgebras to Set, does not have a left adjoint. In this paper we generalize, in a natural way, algebras of terms to multialgebras of terms, whose family of submultialgebras enjoys many properties of the former. One example is that, to every pair consisting of a function, from a submultialgebra of a multialgebra of terms to another multialgebra, and a collection of choices, there corresponds a unique homomorphism, what resembles the universal mapping property. Another example is that the multialgebras of terms are generated by a set that may be viewed as a strong basis, which we call the ground of the multialgebra. Submultialgebras of multialgebras of terms are what we call weakly free multialgebras. Finally, with these definitions at hand, we offer a simple proof that multialgebras with the universal mapping property for the class of all multialgebras do not exist and that \ does not have a left adjoint. (shrink)

. In this paper we address the question of recovering a logic system by combining two or more fragments of it. We show that, in general, by fibring two or more fragments of a given logic the resulting logic is weaker than the original one, because some meta-properties of the connectives are lost after the combination process. In order to overcome this problem, the categories Mcon and Seq of multiple-conclusion consequence relations and sequent calculi, respectively, are introduced. The main feature (...) of these categories is the preservation, by morphisms, of meta-properties of the consequence relations, which allows, in several cases, to recover a logic by fibring of its fragments. The fibring in this categories is called meta−fibring. Several examples of well-known logics which can be recovered by meta-fibring its fragments (in opposition to fibring in the usual categories) are given. Finally, a general semantics for objects in Seq (and, in particular, for objects in Mcon) is proposed, obtaining a category of logic systems called Log. A general theorem of preservation of completeness by fibring in Log is also obtained. (shrink)

The Logics of Deontic (In)Consistency (LDI's) can be considered as the deontic counterpart of the paraconsistent logics known as Logics of Formal (In)Consistency. This paper introduces and studies new LDI's and other paraconsistent deontic logics with different properties: systems tolerant to contradictory obligations; systems in which contradictory obligations trivialize; and a bimodal paraconsistent deontic logic combining the features of previous systems. These logics are used to analyze the well-known Chisholm's paradox, taking profit of the fact that, besides contradictory obligations do (...) not trivialize in LDI's, several logical dependencies of classical logic are blocked in the context of LDI's, allowing to dissolve the paradox. (shrink)

It is well known that there is a correspondence between sets and complete, atomic Boolean algebras (\(\textit{CABA}\)s) taking a set to its power-set and, conversely, a complete, atomic Boolean algebra to its set of atomic elements. Of course, such a correspondence induces an equivalence between the opposite category of \(\textbf{Set}\) and the category of \(\textit{CABA}\)s. We modify this result by taking multialgebras over a signature \(\Sigma\), specifically those whose non-deterministic operations cannot return the empty-set, to \(\textit{CABA}\)s with their zero element (...) removed (which we call a \(\textit{bottomless Boolean algebra}\)) equipped with a structure of \(\Sigma\)-algebra compatible with its order (that we call \(\textit{ord-algebras}\)). Conversely, an ord-algebra over \(\Sigma\) is taken to its set of atomic elements equipped with a structure of multialgebra over \(\Sigma\). This leads to an equivalence between the category of \(\Sigma\)-multialgebras and the category of ord-algebras over \(\Sigma\). The intuition, here, is that if one wishes to do so, non-determinism may be replaced by a sufficiently rich ordering of the underlying structures. (shrink)