On the fully rigorous formalization of deductive reasoning in mathematics

[Vaughan Pratt]

My take on Neil's notion of "Core Logic" is that if Cut serves only to
shorten proofs then it should not be considered part of the core of
mathematical reasoning.

Unless "Core logic" has some pre-existing definition then I don't see the
problem.  Early users of Neil's term might consider referring to it as
"core logic in the sense of Tennant" to avoid confusion.  If the term gets
little or no use it will presumably atrophy in due course.

Vaughan Pratt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/fom/attachments/20220531/a0006015/attachment.html>