|Abstract||1. Rescher 1964 — henceforth HR — proposes a way of reasoning from a set of hypotheses which may include both some of our beliefs and also hypotheses contradicting those beliefs. The aim of this paper is to point out what I take to be a fault in Rescher’s proposal, and to suggest a modification of it, using a nonclassical logic, which avoids that fault. The paper neither attacks nor defends the broader aspects of Rescher’s proposal, but merely assumes that it is at least prima facie worthwhile and therefore worthy of amendment; consequently, I shall try to tinker as little as possible. In particular, the use of a nonclassical logic which I propose does not replace any use by HR of classical logic — in those places where Rescher is classical, I shall be classical, too. (Instead, the amendment introduces a nonclassical logic at a point where HR uses no logic at all.).|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Nicholas Rescher (1971). Temporal Logic. New York,Springer-Verlag.
Graham Priest (2000). Vasil'Év and Imaginary Logic. History and Philosophy of Logic 21 (2):135-146.
Kristian Skagen Ekeli (2007). How Difficult Should It Be to Amend Constitutional Laws? Scandinavian Studies in Law 52:79-101.
Arthur I. Fine (1968). Logic, Probability, and Quantum Theory. Philosophy of Science 35 (2):101-111.
Irving H. Anellis (2009). Russell and His Sources for Non-Classical Logics. Logica Universalis 3 (2).
Graham Priest (2008). An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic: From If to Is. Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2009-05-29
Total downloads8 ( #123,092 of 549,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?