David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 146 (3):283 - 302 (2005)
Classical logic rests on the assumption that there are two mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive truth values. This assumption has always been surrounded by philosophical controversy. Doubts have been raised about its legitimacy, and hence about the legitimacy of classical logic. Usually, the assumption is stated in the form of a general principle, namely the principle that every proposition is either true or false. Then, the philosophical controversy is often framed in terms of the question whether every proposition is either true or false. The main purpose of the paper is to show that there is something wrong in this way of putting things. The point is that the common way of understanding the controversial assumption is misconceived, as it rests on a wrong picture of propositions. In the first part of the paper I outline this picture and I argue against it. In the second part I sketch a different picture of propositions and I suggest how this leads to conceive the issue of classical logic in different terms.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Metaphysics Philosophy of 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
Timothy Williamson (1994). Vagueness. Routledge.
Crispin Wright (1992). Truth and Objectivity. Harvard University Press.
Michael A. E. Dummett (1978). Truth and Other Enigmas. Harvard University Press.
Paul Horwich (2005). Truth. In Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), Erkenntnis. Oxford University Press 261-272.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jonathan Harrison (2004). The Logical Function of ‘That’, or Truth, Propositions and Sentences. Philosophy 79 (1):67-96.
G. F. Liddell (1982). A Logic for Propositions with Indefinite Truth Values. Studia Logica 41 (2-3):197-226.
Alex Blum (2011). The Force of Truth. Philosophical Investigations 34 (4):393-395.
Tomasz Bigaj (2001). Three-Valued Logic, Indeterminacy and Quantum Mechanics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (2):97-119.
Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1992). Classical Logic and Truth-Value Gaps. Philosophical Papers 21 (2):141-150.
Denis McManus (2009). The General Form of the Proposition: The Unity of Language and the Generality of Logic in the Early Wittgenstein. Philosophical Investigations 32 (4):295-318.
Fred Seymour Michael (2002). Entailment and Bivalence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (4):289-300.
Timothy Williamson (2000). Truth, Falsity, and Borderline Cases. Philosophical Topics 28 (1):211-244.
Cheryl Misak (1990). Pragmatism and Bivalence. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (2):171 – 179.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #175,190 of 1,935,139 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,530 of 1,935,139 )
How can I increase my downloads?