David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication (2010)
Many philosophers claim that understanding a logical constant (e.g. ‘if, then’) fundamentally consists in having dispositions to infer according to the logical rules (e.g. Modus Ponens) that fix its meaning. This paper argues that such dispositionalist accounts give us the wrong picture of what understanding a logical constant consists in. The objection here is that they give an account of understanding a logical constant which is inconsistent with what seem to be adequate manifestations of such understanding. I then outline an alternative account according to which understanding a logical constant is not to be understood dispositionally, but propositionally. I argue that this account is not inconsistent with intuitively correct manifestations of understanding the logical constants.
|Keywords||Logical Constants Implicit Definitions Dispositions Understanding Language|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Julien Murzi & Florian Steinberger (2013). Is Logical Knowledge Dispositional? Philosophical Studies 166 (1):165-183.
Similar books and articles
Thomas Kroedel (2012). Implicit Definition and the Application of Logic. Philosophical Studies 158 (1):131-148.
Corine Besson (2010). Propositions, Dispositions and Logical Knolwedge. In M. Bonelli & A. Longo (eds.), Quid Est Veritas? Essays in Honour of Jonathan Barnes. Bibliopolis
K. Warmbrod (1999). Logical Constants. Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Timothy Williamson (2012). Boghossian and Casalegno on Understanding and Inference. Dialectica 66 (2):237-247.
Ken Warmbrōd (1999). Logical Constants. Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Peter Milne (1994). Classical Harmony: Rules of Inference and the Meaning of the Logical Constants. Synthese 100 (1):49 - 94.
Mark Eli Kalderon (2001). Reasoning and Representing. Philosophical Studies 105 (2):129-160.
Mario Gomez-Torrente (2002). The Problem of Logical Constants. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 8 (1):1-37.
Corine Besson (2012). Logical Knowledge and Ordinary Reasoning. Philosophical Studies 158 (1):59-82.
Alexander Yashin (1999). New Intuitionistic Logical Constants and Novikov Completeness. Studia Logica 63 (2):151-180.
Owen Griffiths (2013). Problems for Logical Pluralism. History and Philosophy of Logic 34 (2):170 - 182.
Peter Schroeder-Heister (1984). Popper's Theory of Deductive Inference and the Concept of a Logical Constant. History and Philosophy of Logic 5 (1):79-110.
Kathrin Glüer (2003). Analyticity and Implicit Definition. Grazer Philosophische Studien 66 (1):37-60.
Alice G. B. ter Meulen (2003). From Frege to Dynamic Theories of Meaning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):691-692.
Added to index2011-03-19
Total downloads140 ( #10,052 of 1,699,807 )
Recent downloads (6 months)24 ( #29,086 of 1,699,807 )
How can I increase my downloads?