Inside 206-105

Existential Pontification and Generalized Abstract Digressions

Many-valued logics and bottom

I was flipping through An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic by Graham Priest and the section on many-valued logics caught my eye. Many-valued logics are logics with more than the usual two truth values true and false. The (strong) Kleene 3-valued logic, sets up the following truth table with 0, 1 and x (which is thought to be some value that is neither true nor false):

NOT
    1 0
    x x
    0 1

AND
      1 x 0
    1 1 x 0
    x x x 0
    0 0 0 0

OR
      1 x 0
    1 1 1 1
    x 1 x x
    0 1 x 0

IMPLICATION
      1 x 0
    1 1 x 0
    x 1 x x
    0 1 1 1

I’ve always thought many-valued logics were a bit of a “hack” to deal with the self-referentiality paradoxes, but in fact, Kleene invented his logic by thinking about what happened with partial functions where applied with values that they were not defined for: a sort of denotation failure. So it's not surprising that these truth tables correspond to the parallel-or and and operators predicted by denotational semantics.

The reader is invited to consider whether or not one could use this logic for a Curry-Howard style correspondence; in particular, the law of the excluded middle is not valid in K3.