In this paper a formalized logic of propositions, P A1 , is presented. It is proven consistent and its relationships to traditional logic, to PM ([15]), to subjunctive (including contrary-to-fact) implication and to the “paradoxes” of material and strict implication are developed. Apart from any intrinsic merit it possesses, its chief significance lies in demonstrating the feasibility of a general logic containing the principle of subjunctive contrariety , i.e., the principle that ‘If p were true then q would be true’ and ‘If p were true then q would be false’ are incompatible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rico Angell (1962) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: