### Many-valued logics and bottom

#### by Edward Z. Yang

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.

Did you enjoy this post? Please subscribe to my feed!

Minor edit: I think you are missing the final “e” from Kleene’s name in “The (strong) Kleen 3-valued logic, …”.

Thanks, fixed.