David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 185 (3):387-410 (2012)
The paper investigates the propriety of applying the form versus matter distinction to arguments and to logic in general. Its main point is that many of the currently pervasive views on form and matter with respect to logic rest on several substantive and even contentious assumptions which are nevertheless uncritically accepted. Indeed, many of the issues raised by the application of this distinction to arguments seem to be related to a questionable combination of different presuppositions and expectations; this holds in particular of the vexed issue of demarcating the class of logical constants. I begin with a characterization of currently widespread views on form and matter in logic, which I refer to as ‘logical hylomorphism as we know it’—LHAWKI, for short—and argue that the hylomorphism underlying LHAWKI is mereological. Next, I sketch an overview of the historical developments leading from Aristotelian, non-mereological metaphysical hylomorphism to mereological logical hylomorphism (LHAWKI). I conclude with a reassessment of the prospects for the combination of hylomorphism and logic, arguing in particular that LHAWKI is not the only and certainly not the most suitable version of logical hylomorphism. In particular, this implies that the project of demarcating the class of logical constants as a means to define the scope and nature of logic rests on highly problematic assumptions.
|Keywords||Hylomorphism Demarcation of logic Logical constants History of logic|
|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
Nelson Goodman (1983). Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Harvard University Press.
John Etchemendy (1990). The Concept of Logical Consequence. Harvard University Press.
Mark Johnston (2006). Hylomorphism. Journal of Philosophy 103 (12):652-698.
John Corcoran & Alfred Tarski (1986). What Are Logical Notions? History and Philosophy of Logic 7 (2):143-154.
Jonathan Barnes (2007/2009). Truth, Etc.: Six Lectures on Ancient Logic. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2014). The Undergeneration of Permutation Invariance as a Criterion for Logicality. Erkenntnis 79 (1):81-97.
Similar books and articles
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2012). Reassessing Logical Hylomorphism and the Demarcation of Logical Constants. Synthese 185 (3):387-410.
William Jaworski (2011). Hylomorphism. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 85:173-187.
Michael C. Rea (2011). Hylomorphism Reconditioned. Philosophical Perspectives 25 (1):341-358.
Teresa Britton (2012). The Limits of Hylomorphism. Metaphysica 13 (2):145-153.
K. Warmbrod (1999). Logical Constants. Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Ken Warmbrōd (1999). Logical Constants. Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Corine Besson (2010). Understanding the Logical Constants and Dispositions. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5 (1):1-24.
Mario Gomez-Torrente (2002). The Problem of Logical Constants. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 8 (1):1-37.
Barry Smith & David Murray (1981). Logic, Form and Matter. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 55:47 - 74.
Gila Sher (2011). Is Logic in the Mind or in the World? Synthese 181 (2):353 - 365.
Gila Sher (2003). A Characterization of Logical Constants is Possible. Theoria 18 (2):189-198.
Ignacio Jane (1997). Theoremhood and Logical Consequence. Theoria 12 (1):139-160.
Added to index2010-11-04
Total downloads97 ( #35,072 of 1,780,776 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #165,698 of 1,780,776 )
How can I increase my downloads?