Logical and semantic purity
Protosociology 25:36-48 (2008)
| Abstract | Many mathematicians have sought ‘pure’ proofs of theorems. There are different takes on what a ‘pure’ proof is, though, and it’s important to be clear on their differences, because they can easily be conflated. In this paper I want to distinguish between two of them. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesHeinrich Wansing (2000). The Idea of a Proof-Theoretic Semantics and the Meaning of the Logical Operations. Studia Logica 64 (1):3-20.
Ole T. Hjortland (2009). The Structure of Logical Consequence : Proof-Theoretic Conceptions. Dissertation, University of St Andrews
John MacFarlane, Logical Constants. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Harold T. Hodes (2004). On The Sense and Reference of A Logical Constant. Philosophical Quarterly 54 (214):134-165.
Dana Berthold (2010). Tidy Whitenes: A Genealogy of Race, Purity, and Hygiene. Ethics and the Environment 15 (1):pp. 1-26.
Patrizio Contu (2006). The Justification of the Logical Laws Revisited. Synthese 148 (3):573 - 588.
Patrick Allo (2007). Logical Pluralism and Semantic Information. Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (6):659 - 694.
Michael Detlefsen & Andrew Arana (2011). Purity of Methods. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (2).
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads35 ( #34,776 of 556,840 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,931 of 556,840 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
