Stability and Paradox in Algorithmic Logic

Aitken, W. and Barrett J. A. (2004): Computer implication and the curry paradox, J. Philos. Logic 33, 631–637.

Aitken, W. and Barrett, J. A.: Abstraction in Algorithmic Logic (preprint).

Cantini, A. (1996): Logical frameworks for truth and abstraction: An axiomatic study, North-Holland. ISBN: 0-444-82306-9.

Cantini, A. (2003): The undecidability of Gri $$\breve{{\text{s}}}$$ in's set theory, Stud. Log. 74(3), 345–368.

Feferman, S. (1984): Toward useful type-free theories, J. Symb. Log. 49, 75–111.

Field, H. (2004): The consistency of the naïve theory of properties, Philos. Q. 54(214), 78–104.

Fitch, F. B. (1969): A method for avoiding the Curry paradox, in N. Rescher (ed.), Essays in Honor of Carl G. Hempel, pp. 255–265.

Girard, J.-Y. (1998): Light linear logic, Inform. Comput. 143(2), 175–204.

Link, G. (ed.) (2004): One hundred years of Russell's paradox: Mathematics, logic, philosophy, de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-017438-3.

Myhill, J. (1984) Paradoxes, Synthese 60, 129–143.

Orilia, F. (2000): Property theory and the revision theory of definitions, J. Symb. Log. 65(1), 212–246.

Petersen, U. (2000): Logic without contraction as based on inclusion and unrestricted abstraction, Stud. Log. 64(3), 365–403.

Restall, G. (1994): On logics without contraction, doctoral dissertation, University of Queensland.

Terui, K. (2004) Light affine set theory: A naive set theory of polynomial time, Stud. Log. 77(1), 9–40.

Weir, A. (1998): Naïve set theory, paraconsistency and indeterminacy. I., Log. Anal. (N.S.) 41(161–163), 219–266.