Analysis reveals limitations of Wiredu’s findings on connexive set theory, indicating possible avenues for further exploration.
We show that Wiredu’s result in [26] is not the doom for connexive set theories, not even for those based in logics similar to CC1, one of the original target logics. For this purpose, we present the necessary assumptions for Wiredu’s proof, making some precisions on the connexive requirements. Then we present a non-reflexive variant of CC1 in which Wiredu’s proof can be blocked. Finally, we discuss the prospects of a connexive set theory based on both the non-reflexive and non-transitive variants of CC1, which, even assuming non-triviality, are not very rosy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Estrada‐González et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: