Theoria 18 (2):199-206 (2003)
|Abstract||I offer some brief remarks in reply to comments and criticisms of my earlier work on logical consequence and logical constants. I concentrate on criticisms, especially García-Carpintero’s charge that myviews make no room for modal intuitions about logical consequence, and Sher’s attempted rebuttal of my critique of her theory of logical constants. I show that García-Carpintero’s charge is based on misunderstandings, and that Sher’s attempted rebuttal actually reveals new problems for her theory|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Simon Evnine, The Phenomenological Uniqueness of the Holocaust: Some Philosophical Remarks on Katz's The Holocaust in Historical Context.
Dag Prawitz (1985). Remarks on Some Approaches to the Concept of Logical Consequence. Synthese 62 (2):153 - 171.
Ken Warmbrōd (1999). Logical Constants. Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Stig Kanger & Sören Stenlund (eds.) (1974). Logical Theory and Semantic Analysis: Essays Dedicated to Stig Kanger on His Fiftieth Birthday. Reidel.
Mario Gomez-Torrente (2002). The Problem of Logical Constants. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 8 (1):1-37.
Manuel García-Carpintero (2003). Gómez-Torrente on Modality and Tarskian Logical Consequence. Theoria 18 (2):159-170.
Mario Gómez-Torrente (2003). Logical Consequence and Logical Expressions. Theoria 18 (2):131-144.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?