The title of this paper “Are the validities of modal logic analytic?” makes an explicit reference to Hintikka’s famous article “Are logical truths analytic?” published in the Philosophical Review in 1965 [Hintikka 1965]. In this article Hintikka distinguishes for the first time two ways of understanding the word analytic:
A sentence is said to be analytic when it does not convey any factual information.
A sentence is said to be analytic when it can be shown to be valid by strictly analytic methods.
With respect to these notions of analyticity, Hintikka raises two questions. The first is: are these two notions equivalent? The second is: are the validities of first-order logic, for short FOL, analytic in either of the two senses of analyticity? As concerns the first question, the answer is negative: the two definitions are not equivalent and this is illustrated by Hintikka with a proof that 1 and 2 are not extensionally equivalent. The fact that notions 1 and 2 of analytici...