Skip to content

Justify intuitionistic logic through the BHK interpretation could be problematic #288

Description

@feffemannen

Using the BHK interpretation to justify intuitionistic logic requires a discussion on what we mean by a "function" that transforms a construction of A to a construction of B. van Dalen and Troelstra writes (in Constructivism in Mathematics):

This exercise shows that the BHK-interpretation in itself has no "explanatory power": the possibility of recognizing a classically valid logical schema as being constructively unacceptable depends entirely on our interpretation of "construction", "function", "operation".

The OLT is justifying the ND-rules for intuitionistic logic using the BHK-construction, but a similar BHK based argument justifies the RAA rules as well (interpreting "function" as a classical set theoretic object).

I think this should be commented on in the text together with a discussion on what a constructive transformation could mean. I'm afraid I won't be able to do it good enough.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions