We investigate axiomatizations of Kripke’s theory of truth
based on the Strong Kleene evaluation scheme for treating sentences
lacking a truth value. Feferman’s axiomatization KF formulated
in classical logic is an indirect approach, because it is not sound
with respect to Kripke’s semantics in the straightforward
sense; only the sentences that can be proved to be true in KF are
valid in Kripke’s partial models. Reinhardt proposed to focus
just on the sentences that can be proved to be true in KF and
conjectured that the detour through classical logic in KF is
dispensable. We refute Reinhardt’s Conjecture, and provide a
direct axiomatization PKF of Kripke’s theory in partial
logic. We argue that any natural axiomatization of Kripke’s
theory in Strong Kleene logic has the same proof-theoretic strength as
PKF, namely the strength of the system
RA<ωω ramified analysis or
a system of Tarskian ramified truth up to
ωω. Thus any such axiomatization is much
weaker than Feferman’s axiomatization KF in classical logic,
which is equivalent to the system
RA<ε₀ of ramified analysis up to
ε₀.
@article{1146620166,
author = {Halbach, Volker and Horsten, Leon},
title = {Axiomatizing Kripke's Theory of Truth},
journal = {J. Symbolic Logic},
volume = {71},
number = {1},
year = {2006},
pages = { 677-712},
language = {en},
url = {http://dml.mathdoc.fr/item/1146620166}
}
Halbach, Volker; Horsten, Leon. Axiomatizing Kripke’s Theory of Truth. J. Symbolic Logic, Tome 71 (2006) no. 1, pp. 677-712. http://gdmltest.u-ga.fr/item/1146620166/