This makes it good for formal maths, but bad for philosophy, since it means it can’t encode the speculative movement

Which logic are you saying “can’t encode the speculative moment”?

I think the two logics can emulate one another? Or, at the very least, can describe what the other concludes. I know intuitionistic logic can have classical logic embedded in it through some sort of “put double negation on everything”. I think if you add some sort of modal operator to classical logic you could probably emulate intuitionistic logic in a similar way?

	▲	zozbot234 an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You don't even need to add a modal operator since modal logic itself can be embedded in classical logic via possible-world semantics. Of course the whole thing becomes a bit clunky - but that's the argument for starting with intuitionistic logic, where you wouldn't need to do that.
	▲	bowsamic an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Any logic with LEM