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!