David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (2):247-264 (2010)
This paper claims that there is a plausible sense in which validity is a matter of truth preservation relative to interpretations of the sentences that occur in an argument, although it is not the sense one might have in mind. §1 outlines three independent problems: the first is the paradox of the sorites, the second concerns the fallacy of equivocation, and the third arises in connection with the standard treatment of indexicals. §2 elucidates the claim about validity, while §§3-5 show how the three problems outlined can be handled in accordance with it. §6 explains how the claim squares with the traditional idea that validity is related to formality, and in particular with a broadly accepted definition based on that idea, the model-theoretic definition of logical consequence. Unlike other works on the subject, this paper does not focus on necessity. It is not its intention to provide a characterization of necessity that conforms to some ideal of rigour or to some pre-theoretical understanding of validity. What follows can be taken as conditional on the assumption that such a characterization can be provided
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Joseph Almog, John Perry, Howard K. Wettstein & David Kaplan (eds.) (1989). Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press, USA.
John Etchemendy (1990). The Concept of Logical Consequence. Harvard University Press.
Kit Fine (1975). Vagueness, Truth and Logic. Synthese 30 (3-4):265-300.
William H. Hanson (1997). The Concept of Logical Consequence. Philosophical Review 106 (3):365-409.
Andrea Iacona (2010). Truth Preservation in Any Context. American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (2):191.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Joseph Heath (1998). What is a Validity Claim? Philosophy and Social Criticism 24 (4):23-41.
Christopher Gauker (1990). Semantics Without Reference. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31 (3):437-461.
William H. Hanson (2006). Actuality, Necessity, and Logical Truth. Philosophical Studies 130 (3):437 - 459.
Tomis Kapitan (1982). On the Concept of Material Consequence. History and Philosophy of Logic 3 (2):193-211.
Roberta Ballarin (2005). Validity and Necessity. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34 (3):275 - 303.
William H. Hanson & James Hawthorne (1985). Validity in Intensional Languages: A New Approach. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 26 (1):9-35.
G. Sartor (2000). Legal Validity as Doxastic Obligation: From Definition to Normativity. [REVIEW] Law and Philosophy 19 (5):585-625.
Matthew William McKeon (2009). A Plea for Logical Objects. Synthese 167 (1):163 - 182.
Mario Gómez-Torrente (2000). A Note on Formality and Logical Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (5):529-539.
Added to index2010-07-27
Total downloads30 ( #61,309 of 1,099,942 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #90,387 of 1,099,942 )
How can I increase my downloads?