Proof-Theoretic Semantics, Self-Contradiction, and the Format of Deductive Reasoning
Proof-Theoretic Semantics, Self-Contradiction, and the Format of Deductive Reasoning
复制标题
证明论语义、自相矛盾和演绎推理的形式
DOI：
10.1007/s11245-012-9119-x
复制
发表时间：
2012
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. Schroeder
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Schroeder
从证明论语义学的观点出发，论证了在断言和假设两端有引入规则的序贯演算比自然演算更适合于演绎推理。由于在概念上将结果置于真理之前，它可以处理诸如矛盾推理等没有充分根据的现象。事实上，在它的类型变体中，序列演算有一个明确的和可分离的替换模式，以切割规则的形式，被视为比自然演绎法的一个关键优势，在自然演绎法中，替换被构建到一般框架中。
From the point of view of proof-theoretic semantics, it is argued that the sequent calculus with introduction rules on the assertion and on the assumption side represents deductive reasoning more appropriately than natural deduction. In taking consequence to be conceptually prior to truth, it can cope with non-well-founded phenomena such as contradictory reasoning. The fact that, in its typed variant, the sequent calculus has an explicit and separable substitution schema in form of the cut rule, is seen as a crucial advantage over natural deduction, where substitution is built into the general framework.