On Bolzano’s Alleged Explicativism

Synthese 150 (2):229-246 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Bolzano was the first to establish an explicit distinction between the deductive methods that allow us to recognise the certainty of a given truth and those that provide its objective ground. His conception of the relation between what we, in this paper, call "subjective consequence", i.e., the relation from epistemic reason to consequence and "objective consequence", i.e., grounding however allows for an interpretation according to which Bolzano advocates an "explicativist" conception of proof: proofs par excellence are those that reflect the objective order of grounding. In this paper, we expose the problems involved by such a conception and argue in favour of a more rigorous demarcation between the ontological and the epistemological concern in the elaboration of a theory of demonstration.

Similar books and articles

Erratum.Sandra Lapointe - 2006 - Synthese 152 (1):155-155.
Bolzano's Sententialism.Mark Textor - 1997 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 53 (1):181-202.
Was Wittgenstein a plagiarist?Michael Cohen - 2001 - Philosophy 76 (3):451-459.
Is Logic Formal? Bolzano, Kant and the Kantian Logicians.Sandra Lapointe - 2012 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 85 (1):11-32.
On Bolzano's Concept of a Sum.Paul Rusnock - 2013 - History and Philosophy of Logic 34 (2):155 - 169.
Propositions in Bolzano and Frege.Wolfgang Künne - 1997 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 53 (1):203-240.
Bolzano's Notion of Testifying.Carsten Uwe Gieske - 1997 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 53 (1):249-266.
Preuves par excellence.Jacques Dubucs & Sandra Lapointe - 2003 - Philosophiques 30 (1):219-234.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
384 (#50,187)

6 months
78 (#55,655)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Jacques Dubucs
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Sandra Lapointe
McMaster University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references