Classifying Material Implications over Minimal Logic

The so-called paradoxes of material implication have motivated the development of many non-classical logics over the years \cite{aA75,nB77,aA89,gP89,sH96}. In this note, we investigate some of these paradoxes and classify them, over minimal logic. We provide proofs of equivalence and semantic models separating the paradoxes where appropriate. A number of equivalent groups arise, all of which collapse with unrestricted use of double negation elimination. Interestingly, the principle \emph{ex falso quodlibet}, and several weaker principles, turn out to be distinguishable, giving perhaps supporting motivation for adopting minimal logic as the ambient logic for reasoning in the possible presence of inconsistency.