Graduate studies at Western
Erkenntnis 46 (2):185-214 (1997)
|Abstract||The rule of universal instantiation appears to be subject to counterexamples, although the rule of existential generalization is not subject to the same doubts. This paper is a survey of ways of responding to this problem, both conservative and revisionist. The conclusion drawn is that logical validity should be defined in terms of assertibility in a context rather than in terms of truth on an interpretation. Contexts are here defined, not in terms of the attitudes of the interlocutors, but in terms of the goals of conversation, and assertibility is explained in terms of cooperation.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Zoltan Balazs (2004). Moral Philosophy and the Ontology of Relations. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (3):229-251.
Nicholas Mantegani (2013). Instantiation is Not Partial Identity. Philosophical Studies 163 (3):697-715.
Ann Whittle (2007). The Co-Instantiation Thesis. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (1):61 – 79.
Peter Forrest (2006). The Operator Theory of Instantiation. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):213 – 228.
Paul R. Thagard (1986). Parallel Computation and the Mind-Body Problem. Cognitive Science 10 (3):301-18.
Mark Textor (2001). Does the Truth-Conditional Theory of Sense Work for Indexicals? Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 6 (2):119-137.
Christopher Gauker (1998). What is a Context of Utterance? Philosophical Studies 91 (2):149-172.
Patrick Suppes (1964/2002). First Course in Mathematical Logic. Dover Publications.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #60,347 of 740,538 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,538 )
How can I increase my downloads?