In the paper, we tackle the matter of non-classical logics, in particular, paraconsistent ones, for which not every formula follows in general from inconsistent premisses. Our benchmark is Jaśkowski’s logic, modeled with the help of discussion. The second key origin of this paper is the matter of being tabular, i.e. being adequately expressible by finitely many finite matrices. We analyse Jaśkowski’s non-tabular discussive (discursive) logic $ \textbf {D}_{2}$, one of the first paraconsistent logics, from the perspective of a trivalent tabular (...) logic. We are motivated to step down from the ongoing modal $ \textbf {S5}$-perspective of developing $ \textbf {D}_{2}$ both by certain mysteries that have been surrounding it and by gaps in Jaśkowski’s arguments contra the multivalent tabular perspective. Although Jaśkowski’s idea to use $ \textbf {S5}$ in order to define $ \textbf {D}_{2}$ is very attractive since it allows one to benefit from the tools and results of modal logic, it also gives a ‘non-direct’ formulation and, as it appeared later, is superfluous with respect to what is meant to be achieved since one can define the very same logic but using modal logics weaker than S5. It is also known, due to Kotas, that discussive logic is not finite-valued. So, in light of Kotas’s result that $ \textbf {D}_{2}$ is non-tabular, we propose to associate it with a few dozen discussive formulae that Jaśkowski unequivocally and illustratively suggests to be its theorems or non-theorems rather than with axioms of its modern axiomatizations (one of which Kotas employs) in order to be capable of performing a computer-aided brute-force search for suitable trivalent matrices in the cases of one and two designated values. As a result, we find trivalent matrices with two designated values that might be dubbed ‘discussive’ because they meet Jaśkowski’s suggestion to validate and invalidate the litmus theorems and non-theorems, respectively, despite the fact that none of them validates all the negation axioms in the modern axiomatizations of $ \textbf {D}_{2}$. The matrices found are then analysed along with highlighting the ones that were previously mentioned in the literature. We conclude the paper with a comparative analysis of Omori’s results and a test of Karpenko’s hypothesis. (shrink)

Jaśkowski's discussive (discursive) logic D2 is historically one of the first paraconsistent logics, i.e., logics which 'tolerate' contradictions. Following Jaśkowski's idea to define his discussive logic by means of the modal logic S5 via special translation functions between discussive and modal languages, and supporting at the same time the tradition of paracomplete logics being the counterpart of paraconsistent ones, we present a paracomplete discussive logic D2p.

t. 1. Noosferizm : vvedenie v noosferizm, Noosferizm: dvizhenie, ideologii︠a︡ ili novai︠a︡ nauchno-mirovozzrecheskai︠a︡ sistema? -- t. 2. Noosferizm : Kapitalokratii︠a︡ mify liberizma ... -- t. 3. Noosferizm : Rossii︠a︡ v XXI veke v kontekste ... -- t. 4, kn. 1. Noosferizm : Noosfernoe ili neklassicheskoe chelovekovedeni; kn. 2. Noosfernoe ili neklassicheskoe chelovekovedenie: poisk osnovaniĭ -- t. 5, kn. 1. Noosfernoe ili neklassicheskoe chelovekovedenie: poisk osnovaniĭ; kn. 12. Noosfernoe ili neklassicheskoe chelovekovedenie: poisk osnovaniĭ -- t. 6. kn. 1. Obrazovanie--vysshiĭ imperativ noosfernogo (...) ili ustoĭchivogo razvitii︢a︡ Rossii v XXI veke; kn. 2 Obrazovanie--vysshiĭ imperativ noosfernogo ili ustoĭchivogo razvitii︢a︡ Rossii v XXI veke -- t. 7. Sistemologii︠a︡ obrazovanii︠a︡ i obrazovanievedenie. (shrink)

B. Kooi and A. Tamminga present a correspondence analysis for extensions of G. Priest’s logic of paradox. Each unary or binary extension is characterizable by a special operator and analyzable via a sound and complete natural deduction system. The present paper develops a sound and complete proof searching technique for the binary extensions of the logic of paradox.

The laws of social development are objective in content and, in contrast to the laws of nature, are manifested and function only through the activity of human beings. The development of all spheres of human activity, in turn, cannot be conceived of as independent of the will, consciousness, moods and beliefs, propensities and preferences of human beings, nor as independent of the effectiveness of forms of social organization, etc. The social specificity of laws of social development in turn defines another (...) feature of these laws, namely, their statistical nature. History and social practice persuasively demonstrate that the laws of social development in turn defines another feature of these laws, namely, their statistical nature. History and social practice persuasively demonstrate that the laws of social development, functioning either in all socioeconomic formations or in only some of them , or laws operating within only one of these formations are of a statistical nature. Even when the conditions of life of societies within a particular socioeconomic formation are the same, the results of the operation of any law of social development are never absolutely identical. This is graphically evident in an analysis of the operation of the law of surplus value, the laws of class struggle, or the law of social revolution, especially its operation under the conditions of the contemporary world revolutionary process. We need only point out the variety of nuances in the ultimate results of the operation of the law of social revolution after the Second World War, when socialist countries and countries with a socialist orientation emerged. (shrink)

Издание содержит: Есть ли ошибка в формуле мира?; Бегство от смысла; Секрет формулы мира - закон притяжения?

t. 1. Putʹ dukhovnogo obnovlenii︠a︡ ; Osnovy khristianskoĭ kulʹtury ; Krizis bezbozhii︠a︡ -- t. 2, kn. 1-2. Nashi zadachi -- t. 3. Shleĭermakher i ego "Rechi o religii" : religioznyĭ smysl filosofii : tri rechi, 1914-1923 ; I︠A︡ bgli︠a︡dyvai︠u︡sʹ v zhiznʹ : kniga razdumiĭ ; Poi︠u︡shchee serdt︠s︡e : kniga tikhakh sozert︠s︡aniĭ ; Putʹ k ochevidnosti -- t. 4. Poni︠a︡tii︠a︡ prava i sily ; Obshchee uchenie o prave i gosudarstve ; O suchnosti pravosoznanii︠a︡ ; O monarkhii i respublike -- t. 5. (...) Osnovnoe Nravstvennoe protivorechie voĭny ; O sopotivlenii zlu siloi︠u︡ ; Statʹi, Pisʹma -- t. 6, kn. 1. O li︠u︡beznosti sot︠s︡ialʹno-psikhologicheskiĭ opyt ; Osnovy khudozhestva, o sovershennom v iskusstve ; O tʹme i prosvetlenii : kniga khudozhestvennoĭ kritiki, Bunin, Remnozov, Shmelev -- t. 6, kn. 2. O Rossii ; Russkie pisateli, literatura, teatr, muzyka ; Khudozhnik i khudozhestvennostʹ -- t. 6, kn. 3. O Rossii i russkoĭ dushe ; Genii Rossii -- t. 7. O bolʹshevizme i kommunizme ; Muchenichestvo t︠s︡erkovʹ v sovetskom gosudarstve ; Sovetskiĭ soi︠u︡z ne Rossii︠a︡ ; O nat︠s︡ionalʹnom prievanii Rossii ; Tvorcheskai︠a︡ idei︠a︡ nashego budushchego -- t. 8. Bolʹshevist︠s︡kai︠a︡ politika mirovogo gospodstva ; Vzgli︠a︡d vi︠a︡alʹ ; Kniga razmyshleniĭ i upovaniĭ -- t. 9-10. Dnevnik ; Pisʹma ; Dokumenty (1903-1938) -- [t. 10.] Pisʹma ; Memuary (1939-1954) -- [t. 11. kn. 1] Perepiska dvukh Ivanov (1927-1934) -- [t. 11. kn. 2.] Perepiska dvukh Ivanov (1935-1946) -- [t. 11. kn. 3.] Perepiska dvukh Ivanov (1947-1950) godov -- [t. 12.] Stat·i, lekt︠s︡ii, vystuplenii︠a︡, ret︠s︡enzii (1906-1954) -- [t. 13.] Kto my?; O revoli︠u︡t︠s︡ii ; O religioznom krizise nashikh dneĭ -- [t. 14. kn. 1.] Filosofii︠a︡ Gegeli︠a︡ kak uchenie o konkretnosti Boga i cheloveka : uchenie o Boge -- [t. 14. kn. 2.] Filosofi Gegeli︠a︡ kak uchenie o konkretnosti Boga i cheloveka : uchenie o cheloveke -- [t. 15. kn. 1.] Aksiomy religioznogo opyta : issleovanie -- [t. 15. kn. 2.] Aksiomy religioznogo opyta issledovanie -- [t. 16. kn. 1.] Mir pered propastʹi︠u︡ -- [t. 16. kn. 2.] Mir pered propastʹi︠u︡ ; Analiticherskie zapiski i publit︠s︡istika -- [t. 17.] Gitler i Stalin. Publit︠s︡istika 1939-1945 godov -- [t. 18.] Spravedlivostʹ ili ravenstvo? ; Publit︠s︡istika 1918-1947 godov -- [t. 19.] Russkiĭ kolokol : zhurnal volevoĭ idei [No special title]. (shrink)