David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Analysis 69 (3):480-488 (2009)
It is sometimes held that rules of inference determine the meaning of the logical constants: the meaning of, say, conjunction is fully determined by either its introduction or its elimination rules, or both; similarly for the other connectives. In a recent paper, Panu Raatikainen (2008) argues that this view - call it logical inferentialism - is undermined by some "very little known" considerations by Carnap (1943) to the effect that "in a definite sense, it is not true that the standard rules of inference" themselves suffice to "determine the meanings of [the] logical constants" (p. 2). In a nutshell, Carnap showed that the rules allow for non-normal interpretations of negation and disjunction. Raatikainen concludes that "no ordinary formalization of logic ... is sufficient to `fully formalize' all the essential properties of the logical constants" (ibid.). We suggest that this is a mistake. Pace Raatikainen, intuitionists like Dummett and Prawitz need not worry about Carnap's problem. And although bilateral solutions for classical inferentialists - as proposed by Timothy Smiley and Ian Rumfitt - seem inadequate, it is not excluded that classical inferentialists may be in a position to address the problem too.
|Keywords||Categoricity Problem Logical inferentialism Bilateralism Fundamental Assumption Intuitionism External negation|
|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
I. Rumfitt (2000). Yes and No. Mind 109 (436):781-823.
Citations of this work BETA
Luca Incurvati & Peter Smith (2010). Rejection and Valuations. Analysis 70 (1):3 - 10.
Similar books and articles
Mario Gomez-Torrente (2002). The Problem of Logical Constants. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 8 (1):1-37.
Ken Akiba (1996). Logic as Instrument: The Millian View on the Role of Logic. History and Philosophy of Logic 17 (1-2):73-83.
Panu Raatikainen (2008). On Rules of Inference and the Meanings of Logical Constants. Analysis 68 (300):282-287.
Stephen Read (2000). Harmony and Autonomy in Classical Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (2):123-154.
Fernando Ferreira (2008). The Co-Ordination Principles: A Problem for Bilateralism. Mind 117 (468):1051-1057.
Stephen Read (2010). General-Elimination Harmony and the Meaning of the Logical Constants. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (5):557-76.
Peter Milne (1994). Classical Harmony: Rules of Inference and the Meaning of the Logical Constants. Synthese 100 (1):49 - 94.
Added to index2009-07-01
Total downloads125 ( #14,266 of 1,707,714 )
Recent downloads (6 months)49 ( #15,883 of 1,707,714 )
How can I increase my downloads?