ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] type free logic and higher order quantification

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rick Murphy <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Pat Hayes <phayes@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:15:28 -0500
Message-id: <E941EF02-117E-4539-AA59-408F557F0B7A@xxxxxxx>

On Aug 18, 2011, at 4:58 PM, Rick Murphy wrote:    (01)

> Hey All:
> 
> Long time no ont.
> 
> I am researching type free logics with higher order quantification.    (02)

You need to be achingly precise about what you count as 'higher order'. Common 
Logic is type-free and (some would say) uses (what certainly looks very like) 
higher-order quantification, in that it allows one to quantify over names in 
predicate and function positions, like this:    (03)

(forall (f)(iff (transitive f)(forall x y z)(if (and (f x y)(f y z)) (f x z) )) 
))    (04)

However, CL has a first-order semantics and its metatheory is much closer to FO 
than HO, so many logicians would *not* count it as a higher-order logic. It has 
been called FO logic with a HO syntax, or HO logic with a FO semantics.     (05)

Here is a test case to hone your intuitions. Consider these axioms:    (06)

(R a)
(Q b)    (07)

And ask yourself whether these entail the following:    (08)

(exists (p)(and (p a)(p b) )    (09)

i.e. that there is a property that applies both to a and to b.     (010)

If you intuitively answer "no", then you are thinking first-order, and would 
likely find CL congenial. If it seems obviously "yes", then you are thinking in 
a genuinely higher-order way.     (011)

It really does matter which way you choose, as you will be interested in very 
different logics.     (012)

Pat    (013)



> I
> would like to read some (free) academic research on this topic and
> wondered whether anyone could point me at published papers.
> 
> Google only matches six documents on the terms "type free logic" and
> "higher order quantification". 
> 
> Research here seems thin, probably my ignorance.
> 
> Chris I have read your paper. The references don't seem to point at
> direct prior research on these combined subjects.
> 
> --
> Rick
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> 
>     (014)

------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC                                     (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   
40 South Alcaniz St.           (850)202 4416   office
Pensacola                            (850)202 4440   fax
FL 32502                              (850)291 0667   mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us       http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes    (015)






_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (016)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>