Studia Logica 74 (3):441 - 468 (2003)
|Abstract||The paper discusses the similarity between geometry, arithmetic, and logic, specifically with respect to the question of whether applied theories of each may be revised. It argues that they can - even when the revised logic is a paraconsistent one, or the revised arithmetic is an inconsistent one. Indeed, in the case of logic, it argues that logic is not only revisable, but, during its history, it has been revised. The paper also discusses Quine's well known argument against the possibility of logical deviancy.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
A. Avron & B. Konikowska (2008). Rough Sets and 3-Valued Logics. Studia Logica 90 (1):69 - 92.
George Georgescu (2006). N-Valued Logics and Łukasiewicz–Moisil Algebras. Axiomathes 16 (1-2).
Greg Restall (2002). Paraconsistency Everywhere. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 43 (3):147-156.
Daniele Mundici (2011). Consequence and Interpolation in Łukasiewicz Logic. Studia Logica 99 (1-3):269-278.
Thomas Vetterlein (2008). A Way to Interpret Łukasiewicz Logic and Basic Logic. Studia Logica 90 (3):407 - 423.
Andrew Aberdein & Stephen Read (2009). The Philosophy of Alternative Logics. In Leila Haaparanta (ed.), The Development of Modern Logic. Oxford University Press.
J. B. Paris & N. Pathmanathan (2006). A Note on Priest's Finite Inconsistent Arithmetics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (5):529 - 537.
Itala M. Loffredo D'Ottaviano & Hércules Araujo Feitosa (2006). Translating From Łukasiewicz's Logics Into Classical Logic: Is It Possible? Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 91 (1):157-168.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads21 ( #58,806 of 549,754 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,450 of 549,754 )
How can I increase my downloads?