cbostrum (02/17/83)
I am very interested in hearing from anyone who knows anything about various logics that claim to include more signifgant claims about meaning in them that the traditional FOL. In particular, I am interested in plausible model theories for such logics, especially those where the Theory operator is not monotonic. Is this in fact true for some relevance logics? It is true for some counterfactual logics, but I dont understand the semantics in any practical sense. By plausible I mean those that can be cashed out sensibly in the real world (physical!) and not "possible worlds" semantics. Can anybody help me?