Hypergendered Logic Source
Hypergendered Logic — Page 44
SF1≡PAx∧PA¬y. Status: strict HGL axiom consequence. Worked Example 3 — SF2 conjunction elimination From SF2 = IH(SF1) AND IH(NOT SM1) AND PH(SF1) AND NOT PH(SM1) AND UD(SF1) AND PA(x) AND PA(NOT y) AND NOT FD(SF1) infer each of the eight conjuncts: IH(SF1), IH(NOT SM1), PH(SF1), NOT PH(SM1), UD(SF1), PA(x), PA(NOT y), and NOT FD(SF1). Status: classical deduction. Worked Example 4 — SF2 inherits SF1 SF2⇒IHSF1⇒SF1. Status: deduction using conjunction elimination and IH projection. Worked Example 5 — SF2 is non-SM1 SF2⇒IH¬SM1⇒¬SM1. Status: deduction. Worked Example 6 — Noninheritance is weaker than inherited negation Assume ¬IHSM1. This tells us only that SM1 is not inherited. It does not entail ¬SM1. But IH¬SM1⇒¬SM1. Status: deduction/countermodel distinction. Worked Example 7 — Negating SF2 NOT SF2 = NOT IH(SF1) OR NOT IH(NOT SM1) OR NOT PH(SF1) OR PH(SM1) OR NOT UD(SF1) OR NOT PA(x) OR NOT PA(NOT y) OR FD(SF1) Status: De Morgan deduction. Worked Example 8 — De Morgan does not move NOT through IH From ¬IHSF1 one may not infer IH¬SF1. Status: invalid inference demonstration. Worked Example 9 — De Morgan does not move NOT through PA From one may not infer . ¬𝑃𝐴𝑥 ( ) 𝑃𝐴¬𝑥 ( ) Status: invalid inference demonstration. Worked Example 10 — SF3 immediate inheritance SF3 = IH(SF2) AND IH(NOT SM2) AND PH(SF2) AND NOT PH(SM2) AND UD(SF2) AND NOT FD(SF2)
Source Canon: Verbatim mathematical and modal logic. Interactive navigation and operator lookups available at /#hgl-part:44.