Noûs 36 (s1):197-219 (2002)
|Abstract||One logic or many? I say--many. Or rather, I say there is one logic for each way of specifying the class of all possible circumstances, or models, i.e., all ways of interpreting a given language. But because there is no unique way of doing this, I say there is no unique logic except in a relative sense. Indeed, given any two competing logical theories T1 and T2 (in the same language) one could always consider their common core, T, and settle on that theory. So, given any language L, one could settle on the minimal logic T0 corresponding to the common core shared by all competitors. That would be a way of resisting relativism, as long as one is willing to redraw the bounds of logic accordingly. However, such a minimal theory T0 may be empty if the syntax of L contains no special ingredients the interpretation of which is independent of the specification of the relevant L-models. And generally--I argue--this is indeed the case.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Michael D. Resnik (1985). Logic: Normative or Descriptive? The Ethics of Belief or a Branch of Psychology? Philosophy of Science 52 (2):221-238.
Timm Triplett (1988). Azande Logic Versus Western Logic? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39 (3):361-366.
George Lakoff (1970). Linguistics and Natural Logic. Synthese 22 (1-2):151 - 271.
Clark Glymour (2012). On the Possibility of Inference to the Best Explanation. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):461-469.
Gabriel Sandu (2009). Logic and Semantics in the Twentieth Century. In Leila Haaparanta (ed.), The Development of Modern Logic. Oxford University Press.
Reinhard Muskens (2001). Talking About Trees and Truth-Conditions. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10 (4):417-455.
Reinhard Muskens (1991). [Book Chapter]. Springer Netherlands.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #106,476 of 549,699 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?