Constructive logic is a family of logics where proofs must be constructive (i.e., proving something means one must build or exhibit it, not just argue it “must exist” abstractly). No “non-constructive” proofs are allowed (like the classic proof by contradiction without a witness).
The main constructive logics are the following:
Founder: L. E. J. Brouwer (1908, philosophy)[1][2] formalized by A. Heyting (1930)[3] and A. N. Kolmogorov (1932)[4]
Key Idea: Truth = having a proof. One cannot assert “ or not ” unless one can prove or prove .
Features:
Used in: type theory, constructive mathematics.
Founder(s):
Interpretation (Gödel): means “ is provable” (or “necessarily ” in the proof sense).
Further: Modern provability logics build on this.
Simpler than intuitionistic logic.
Founder: I. Johansson (1937)[6]
Key Idea: Like intuitionistic logic but without assuming the principle of explosion (ex falso quodlibet, “from falsehood, anything follows”).
Features:
Used for: Studying logics without commitment to contradictions blowing up the system.
Founder: P. E. R. Martin-Löf (1970s)
Key Idea: Types = propositions, terms = proofs (this is the Curry–Howard correspondence).
Features:
Used in: Proof assistants like Coq, Agda.
Not strictly intuitionistic, but very constructive.
Key Idea: Resource sensitivity — one can only use an assumption once unless one specifically says it can be reused.
Features:
Used in: Computer science, concurrency, quantum logic.